lamers on IRC

lamers on IRC

[Emanuel Berg]

One problem with IRC is the presence of lamers, luckily this
problem can be solved easily with technology starting with the
IRC client. Today I learned how to do this with my client,
ERC:

(let ((lamers '("parsnip" "wgreenhouse")))
  (setq-default erc-ignore-list       lamers)
  (setq         erc-ignore-reply-list lamers) )

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: lamers on IRC

[Jean Louis]

* Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> [2022-05-23 00:22]:
> One problem with IRC is the presence of lamers, luckily this
> problem can be solved easily with technology starting with the
> IRC client. Today I learned how to do this with my client,
> ERC:

😥 Emacs channel for years has no moderators who moderate by common
sense and police the channel for good behavior, there are no special
rules, and those policies displayed like to avoid discrimination and
asshatery will be quickly broken by those few dominating over larger
group of people there.

And people participating, often few hundreds of them may think and get
opinion that rude behavior is acceptable -- no it is not normal, there
are many occurences of unfriendly and abusively dominating behavior. 

Some of alpha monkey dominators will switch from channel to channel
after the user and even complain why did that user go to other
channel. They go because of abusive behavior.

Public come to #emacs for Emacs reasons. They will often find
narcissists' behavior and abuse. Insults and mockery are common.

#emacs IMHO is not GNU governedchannel, rather it is GNU project
related channel, IMHO, is also not moderated by GNU Kind
Communication Guidelines.

This is appearing as generalization, as I do not want to mention the
dominators' nick names.

Some people complain on Libreplanet mailing list on unwelcoming
environments in social networks around free software. I can really
understand such complaints, and I like to point to friendly digital
places for help. IMHO #emacs channel on IRC is such place due to few
dominating parties. This is because dominators live in their own
digital world behind the computer, forgetting about the human beings
on other side of the world.

-- 
Jean

Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns:
https://www.fsf.org/campaigns

In support of Richard M. Stallman
https://stallmansupport.org/

Re: lamers on IRC

[Colin Baxter]

>>>>> Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> writes:

    > * Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> [2022-05-23 00:22]:
    >> One problem with IRC is the presence of lamers, luckily this
    >> problem can be solved easily with technology starting with the
    >> IRC client. Today I learned how to do this with my client, ERC:

    > 😥️ Emacs channel for years has no moderators who moderate by
    > common sense and police the channel for good behavior, there are
    > no special rules, and those policies displayed like to avoid
    > discrimination and asshatery will be quickly broken by those few
    > dominating over larger group of people there.

    > And people participating, often few hundreds of them may think and
    > get opinion that rude behavior is acceptable -- no it is not
    > normal, there are many occurences of unfriendly and abusively
    > dominating behavior.

    > Some of alpha monkey dominators will switch from channel to
    > channel after the user and even complain why did that user go to
    > other channel. They go because of abusive behavior.

    > Public come to #emacs for Emacs reasons. They will often find
    > narcissists' behavior and abuse. Insults and mockery are common.

    > #emacs IMHO is not GNU governedchannel, rather it is GNU project
    > related channel, IMHO, is also not moderated by GNU Kind
    > Communication Guidelines.

    > This is appearing as generalization, as I do not want to mention
    > the dominators' nick names.

    > Some people complain on Libreplanet mailing list on unwelcoming
    > environments in social networks around free software. I can really
    > understand such complaints, and I like to point to friendly
    > digital places for help. IMHO #emacs channel on IRC is such place
    > due to few dominating parties. This is because dominators live in
    > their own digital world behind the computer, forgetting about the
    > human beings on other side of the world.

I agree wholeheartily with the above. I tried #emacs but quickly gave
up and now never go there.

Best wishes,

Re: lamers on IRC

[Emanuel Berg]

Colin Baxter wrote:

> I agree wholeheartily with the above. I tried #emacs but
> quickly gave up and now never go there.

#emacs and IRC in general can be fun, the usefulness of it is
often short questions that you know there is a short and easy
answer to, but for some reason you can't find it in
the documentation.

For long questions and in particular long answers or many
different answers that require discussion and maybe subsequent
questions mailing lists/newsgroups are better.

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: lamers on IRC

[Eric Abrahamsen]

Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> writes:

> * Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> [2022-05-23 00:22]:
>> One problem with IRC is the presence of lamers, luckily this
>> problem can be solved easily with technology starting with the
>> IRC client. Today I learned how to do this with my client,
>> ERC:
>
> 😥 Emacs channel for years has no moderators who moderate by common
> sense and police the channel for good behavior, there are no special
> rules, and those policies displayed like to avoid discrimination and
> asshatery will be quickly broken by those few dominating over larger
> group of people there.
>
> And people participating, often few hundreds of them may think and get
> opinion that rude behavior is acceptable -- no it is not normal, there
> are many occurences of unfriendly and abusively dominating behavior. 
>
> Some of alpha monkey dominators will switch from channel to channel
> after the user and even complain why did that user go to other
> channel. They go because of abusive behavior.
>
> Public come to #emacs for Emacs reasons. They will often find
> narcissists' behavior and abuse. Insults and mockery are common.
>
> #emacs IMHO is not GNU governedchannel, rather it is GNU project
> related channel, IMHO, is also not moderated by GNU Kind
> Communication Guidelines.
>
> This is appearing as generalization, as I do not want to mention the
> dominators' nick names.
>
> Some people complain on Libreplanet mailing list on unwelcoming
> environments in social networks around free software. I can really
> understand such complaints, and I like to point to friendly digital
> places for help. IMHO #emacs channel on IRC is such place due to few
> dominating parties. This is because dominators live in their own
> digital world behind the computer, forgetting about the human beings
> on other side of the world.

The Emacs channel on Matrix is a pretty reasonable place.

Re: lamers on IRC

[Philip Kaludercic]

Eric Abrahamsen <eric@ericabrahamsen.net> writes:

> The Emacs channel on Matrix is a pretty reasonable place.

Aren't the two bridged together?

Re: lamers on IRC

[Eric Abrahamsen]

Philip Kaludercic <philipk@posteo.net> writes:

> Eric Abrahamsen <eric@ericabrahamsen.net> writes:
>
>> The Emacs channel on Matrix is a pretty reasonable place.
>
> Aren't the two bridged together?

No! And that idea has been explicitly rejected, for all the reasons
raised in this thread. #emacs is bridged to its own Matrix room (might
be getting the terminology wrong), but Matrix has its own separate Emacs
room.

Re: lamers on IRC

[Jon Fineman]

> Eric Abrahamsen <eric@ericabrahamsen.net> writes:
>
>> Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> writes:
>>
>>
>> The Emacs channel on Matrix is a pretty reasonable place.

What do you use to connect to Emacs on Matrix? My understanding is ERC
doesn't support Matrix.

Thanks.

Re: lamers on IRC

[Eric Abrahamsen]

Jon Fineman <jon@fineman.me> writes:

>> Eric Abrahamsen <eric@ericabrahamsen.net> writes:
>>
>>> Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> writes:
>>>
>>>
>>> The Emacs channel on Matrix is a pretty reasonable place.
>
> What do you use to connect to Emacs on Matrix? My understanding is ERC
> doesn't support Matrix.

I just use Element, I'm afraid. I know there's ement and some other
packages that will talk to Matrix, but I haven't tried them. I may have
reached the limits of my put-everything-in-emacs urge :)

Re: lamers on IRC

[Philip Kaludercic]

Eric Abrahamsen <eric@ericabrahamsen.net> writes:

> Jon Fineman <jon@fineman.me> writes:
>
>>> Eric Abrahamsen <eric@ericabrahamsen.net> writes:
>>>
>>>> Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> writes:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The Emacs channel on Matrix is a pretty reasonable place.
>>
>> What do you use to connect to Emacs on Matrix? My understanding is ERC
>> doesn't support Matrix.
>
> I just use Element, I'm afraid. I know there's ement and some other
> packages that will talk to Matrix, but I haven't tried them. I may have
> reached the limits of my put-everything-in-emacs urge :)

The Hydrogen (https://hydrogen.element.io) client is also worth checking out
if you need a web-based client but Element is to heavy.

Re: lamers on IRC

[Jean Louis]

* Jon Fineman <jon@fineman.me> [2022-05-25 01:27]:
> 
> > Eric Abrahamsen <eric@ericabrahamsen.net> writes:
> >
> >> Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> writes:
> >>
> >>
> >> The Emacs channel on Matrix is a pretty reasonable place.
> 
> What do you use to connect to Emacs on Matrix? My understanding is ERC
> doesn't support Matrix.

Try this one:

matrix-client.el | Matrix.org
https://matrix.org/docs/projects/client/matrix-client-el


-- 
Jean

Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns:
https://www.fsf.org/campaigns

In support of Richard M. Stallman
https://stallmansupport.org/

Re: lamers on IRC

[Thomas Lord]

This reads like someone trying to divide and
conquer

On 2022-05-22 23:50, Jean Louis wrote:
> * Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> [2022-05-23 00:22]:
>> One problem with IRC is the presence of lamers, luckily this
>> problem can be solved easily with technology starting with the
>> IRC client. Today I learned how to do this with my client,
>> ERC:
> 
> 😥 Emacs channel for years has no moderators who moderate by common
> sense and police the channel for good behavior, there are no special
> rules, and those policies displayed like to avoid discrimination and
> asshatery will be quickly broken by those few dominating over larger
> group of people there.
> 
> And people participating, often few hundreds of them may think and get
> opinion that rude behavior is acceptable -- no it is not normal, there
> are many occurences of unfriendly and abusively dominating behavior.
> 
> Some of alpha monkey dominators will switch from channel to channel
> after the user and even complain why did that user go to other
> channel. They go because of abusive behavior.
> 
> Public come to #emacs for Emacs reasons. They will often find
> narcissists' behavior and abuse. Insults and mockery are common.
> 
> #emacs IMHO is not GNU governedchannel, rather it is GNU project
> related channel, IMHO, is also not moderated by GNU Kind
> Communication Guidelines.
> 
> This is appearing as generalization, as I do not want to mention the
> dominators' nick names.
> 
> Some people complain on Libreplanet mailing list on unwelcoming
> environments in social networks around free software. I can really
> understand such complaints, and I like to point to friendly digital
> places for help. IMHO #emacs channel on IRC is such place due to few
> dominating parties. This is because dominators live in their own
> digital world behind the computer, forgetting about the human beings
> on other side of the world.

Re: lamers on IRC

[Emanuel Berg]

Thomas Lord wrote:

> This reads like someone trying to divide and conquer

Science at last!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divide-and-conquer_algorithm

:)

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: lamers on IRC

[Emanuel Berg]

Jean Louis wrote:

>> One problem with IRC is the presence of lamers, luckily
>> this problem can be solved easily with technology starting
>> with the IRC client. Today I learned how to do this with my
>> client, ERC:
>
> Emacs channel for years has no moderators who moderate by
> common sense and police the channel for good behavior, there
> are no special rules, and those policies displayed like to
> avoid discrimination and asshatery will be quickly broken by
> those few dominating over larger group of people there [...]

But actually I think that's good, you just configure your own
clients do do that for you.

I.e., everyone has or can have his own rules, but no one is
forced to live by everyone's rules.

The problem with "everyone's rules" is that if the web cops
are not sensible, they'll impose their behavior ... and who is
to say if they are or are not BTW? The person kicked out will
always think they are not anyway, so at the very least the
system is imperfect. And there isn't a solution - web cops for
the web cops? But then - etc.

And if that is the problem with the web cop solution in
general, the practical problem is that what people are
attracted to that role - and why.

But actually, the reason I wrote that post was ... ah,
whatever :)

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: lamers on IRC

[Jean Louis]

* Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> [2022-05-24 00:44]:
> Jean Louis wrote:
> 
> >> One problem with IRC is the presence of lamers, luckily
> >> this problem can be solved easily with technology starting
> >> with the IRC client. Today I learned how to do this with my
> >> client, ERC:
> >
> > Emacs channel for years has no moderators who moderate by
> > common sense and police the channel for good behavior, there
> > are no special rules, and those policies displayed like to
> > avoid discrimination and asshatery will be quickly broken by
> > those few dominating over larger group of people there [...]
> 
> But actually I think that's good, you just configure your own
> clients do do that for you.
> 
> I.e., everyone has or can have his own rules, but no one is
> forced to live by everyone's rules.

It is actually wrong, as by IRC nature when single user (A) blocks
somebody, only single user does not see what that somebody does, all
other people do see, and they may not even have idea that you do not
see, let us say harassment of user (A) -- behavior is exposed to
public hanging on such channel, as public learns by example and it
attracts more of narcissistic people to join in, and scares people who
behave well.

When there is moderator with common sense, then such moderator does
not impede the exchange of opinions, but personal attacks, illegal
and bad behavior. Then the public learns by example and behaves well.

-- 
Jean

Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns:
https://www.fsf.org/campaigns

In support of Richard M. Stallman
https://stallmansupport.org/

Re: lamers on IRC

[Emanuel Berg]

Jean Louis wrote:

> When there is moderator with common sense, then such
> moderator does not impede the exchange of opinions, but
> personal attacks, illegal and bad behavior. Then the public
> learns by example and behaves well.

I personally do not believe in moderators since they often
don't do their jobs and then it's better not to have them
at all.

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: lamers on IRC

[Samuel Wales]

the moderator is often the problem.  i quit irc completely.  but i
have a hard time believing that there are better places.

On 5/25/22, Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> wrote:
> Jean Louis wrote:
>
>> When there is moderator with common sense, then such
>> moderator does not impede the exchange of opinions, but
>> personal attacks, illegal and bad behavior. Then the public
>> learns by example and behaves well.
>
> I personally do not believe in moderators since they often
> don't do their jobs and then it's better not to have them
> at all.
>
> --
> underground experts united
> https://dataswamp.org/~incal
>
>
>


-- 
The Kafka Pandemic

A blog about science, health, human rights, and misopathy:
https://thekafkapandemic.blogspot.com

Re: lamers on IRC

[Samuel Wales]

[i wasn't saying that there should be no moderators.  i was merely
pointing out aht moderators who cause harm exist.  and it seems nobody
is willing or able to remove the moderator powers or the moderator.]

On 5/25/22, Samuel Wales <samologist@gmail.com> wrote:
> the moderator is often the problem.  i quit irc completely.  but i
> have a hard time believing that there are better places.
>
> On 5/25/22, Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> wrote:
>> Jean Louis wrote:
>>
>>> When there is moderator with common sense, then such
>>> moderator does not impede the exchange of opinions, but
>>> personal attacks, illegal and bad behavior. Then the public
>>> learns by example and behaves well.
>>
>> I personally do not believe in moderators since they often
>> don't do their jobs and then it's better not to have them
>> at all.
>>
>> --
>> underground experts united
>> https://dataswamp.org/~incal
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> The Kafka Pandemic
>
> A blog about science, health, human rights, and misopathy:
> https://thekafkapandemic.blogspot.com
>


-- 
The Kafka Pandemic

A blog about science, health, human rights, and misopathy:
https://thekafkapandemic.blogspot.com

Re: lamers on IRC

[Samuel Banya]

You know, Liberachat isn't the only IRC network right? Just a thought.

On Wed, May 25, 2022, at 7:58 PM, Samuel Wales wrote:
> [i wasn't saying that there should be no moderators.  i was merely
> pointing out aht moderators who cause harm exist.  and it seems nobody
> is willing or able to remove the moderator powers or the moderator.]
> 
> On 5/25/22, Samuel Wales <samologist@gmail.com> wrote:
> > the moderator is often the problem.  i quit irc completely.  but i
> > have a hard time believing that there are better places.
> >
> > On 5/25/22, Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> wrote:
> >> Jean Louis wrote:
> >>
> >>> When there is moderator with common sense, then such
> >>> moderator does not impede the exchange of opinions, but
> >>> personal attacks, illegal and bad behavior. Then the public
> >>> learns by example and behaves well.
> >>
> >> I personally do not believe in moderators since they often
> >> don't do their jobs and then it's better not to have them
> >> at all.
> >>
> >> --
> >> underground experts united
> >> https://dataswamp.org/~incal
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > The Kafka Pandemic
> >
> > A blog about science, health, human rights, and misopathy:
> > https://thekafkapandemic.blogspot.com
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> The Kafka Pandemic
> 
> A blog about science, health, human rights, and misopathy:
> https://thekafkapandemic.blogspot.com
> 
> 

Re: lamers on IRC

[Jean Louis]

* Samuel Banya <sbanya@fastmail.com> [2022-05-26 04:50]:
> You know, Liberachat isn't the only IRC network right? Just a thought.

There are many, but most of people are gathered on Freenode and
Liberachat

-- 
Jean

Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns:
https://www.fsf.org/campaigns

In support of Richard M. Stallman
https://stallmansupport.org/

Re: lamers on IRC

[Jean Louis]

In my opinion, Emacs should have direct access to its social
networks. Here are some alternatives to communicate with other Emacs
users.


IRC
━━━

IRC is good as Emacs has direct access to it with its irc and erc
packages and maybe others.


XMPP
━━━━

XMPP | The universal messaging standard
https://xmpp.org/

XMPP chat has channels and there are Emacs related channels, with no
so many people, again there will be few dominating people from IRC
hanging on XMPP as well. Emacs package jabber.el is good to acess
XMPP.

jabber.el
http://emacs-jabber.sourceforge.net/

EmacsWiki: Jabber El
https://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/JabberEl

XMPP chat rooms are here:
"emacs" - search.jabber.network
https://search.jabber.network/search?q=emacs


Telegram
━━━━━━━━

There is Telegram group https://t.me/emacs_en with 845 people inside,
accessible through free software "Telegram Desktop", even though it
accesses centralized network, it is similar in a way to IRC.

There is Telega, Emacs client to Telegram:
Website: https://github.com/zevlg/telega.el

Another Telegram group with 267 members: https://t.me/emacstalk


Fediverse
━━━━━━━━━

Client for Emacs to access Fediverse:

martianh/mastodon.el: Emacs client for Mastodon - mastodon.el - Codeberg.org
https://codeberg.org/martianh/mastodon.el

And I guess it will probably work with Pleroma too, not only Mastodon,
as Pleroma has the same API.


Matrix 
━━━━━━━

matrix-client.el | Matrix.org
https://matrix.org/docs/projects/client/matrix-client-el

inside of Matrix chat there are few channels related to Emacs with few
thousands of users.


-- 
Jean

Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns:
https://www.fsf.org/campaigns

In support of Richard M. Stallman
https://stallmansupport.org/

Re: lamers on IRC

[Philip Kaludercic]

Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> writes:

> IRC is good as Emacs has direct access to it with its irc and erc
                                                        ^
                                                        rcirc

> packages and maybe others.
               ^
               https://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/InternetRelayChat#h5o-1

Re: lamers on IRC

[Emanuel Berg]

Philip Kaludercic wrote:

>> IRC is good as Emacs has direct access to it with its irc and erc
>                                                        ^
>                                                        rcirc
>
>> packages and maybe others.
>               ^
>               https://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/InternetRelayChat#h5o-1

Is it too much of a good thing?

Or is too much of a good thing - a good thing?

No, it's good that there are many ...

Proliferation/multitude/plethora/ubiqutious ... that's just
fancy ways of saying it!

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: lamers on IRC

[Jean Louis]

* Philip Kaludercic <philipk@posteo.net> [2022-05-27 17:31]:
> Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> writes:
> 
> > IRC is good as Emacs has direct access to it with its irc and erc
>                                                         ^
>                                                         rcirc
> 
> > packages and maybe others.
>                ^
>                https://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/InternetRelayChat#h5o-1

Oh yes, so many IRC packages, thanks!

There are also Emacs based IRC clients:

    ERC
    IrChat
    LieceIrcClient
    rcirc
    RieceIrcClient
    ZenIRC
    Circe
    ii-mode
    WeeChat

-- 
Jean

Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns:
https://www.fsf.org/campaigns

In support of Richard M. Stallman
https://stallmansupport.org/

Re: lamers on IRC

[Emanuel Berg]

Jean Louis wrote:

> There are also Emacs based IRC clients:
>
>   ERC [...]
>   rcirc

ERC is built-in, it's part of vanilla Emacs. See `erc'.

So is rcirc, it's the default IRC client for Emacs, the one
you get with M-x irc RET (`irc' is an alias for `rcirc'.)

>  WeeChat

If you refer to [1] I don't think that's enough to say it's
"based" on Emacs, I have no experience from it tho so maybe
it is.

[1] https://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/WeeChat

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: lamers on IRC

[Emanuel Berg]

Jean Louis wrote:

> Fediverse
>
> Client for Emacs to access Fediverse:
>
> martianh/mastodon.el: Emacs client for Mastodon -
> mastodon.el - Codeberg.org
> https://codeberg.org/martianh/mastodon.el

You can use Emacs as a client to be active there (and on a lot
of other places I guess!) but the Emacs knowledge is almost
infinitely small compared to the mailing lists, #emacs,
SX Emacs ...

And that's even a weird thing to say since it isn't an Emacs
place, you can hashtag #emacs for all the luck it'll bring you
but that's it ...

Maybe if you plan an event it makes sense to do?

Mastodon is like FOSS Facebook/Twitter, here are a couple of
my posts BTW. But I grew tired pretty soon, it is fun for
photos tho since it is so integrated from the smartphone ...

  https://bsd.network/@incal/108289923434818556  <-- hot <3
  https://bsd.network/@incal/108236726667435742  <-- altruistic
  https://bsd.network/@incal/108258462997950026  <-- cool
  https://bsd.network/@solene/108301260967811466 <-- patriotic

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: lamers on IRC

[Samuel Banya]

> > Fediverse
> >
> > Client for Emacs to access Fediverse:
> >
> > martianh/mastodon.el: Emacs client for Mastodon -
> > mastodon.el - Codeberg.org
> > https://codeberg.org/martianh/mastodon.el

That's awesome.

Didn't know there were federated instances in this respect.

I had no idea you could interact with Mastodon within Emacs as well. Very cool stuff.

Thanks for sharing this,

Sam

On Fri, May 27, 2022, at 11:06 AM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> Jean Louis wrote:
> 
> > Fediverse
> >
> > Client for Emacs to access Fediverse:
> >
> > martianh/mastodon.el: Emacs client for Mastodon -
> > mastodon.el - Codeberg.org
> > https://codeberg.org/martianh/mastodon.el
> 
> You can use Emacs as a client to be active there (and on a lot
> of other places I guess!) but the Emacs knowledge is almost
> infinitely small compared to the mailing lists, #emacs,
> SX Emacs ...
> 
> And that's even a weird thing to say since it isn't an Emacs
> place, you can hashtag #emacs for all the luck it'll bring you
> but that's it ...
> 
> Maybe if you plan an event it makes sense to do?
> 
> Mastodon is like FOSS Facebook/Twitter, here are a couple of
> my posts BTW. But I grew tired pretty soon, it is fun for
> photos tho since it is so integrated from the smartphone ...
> 
>   https://bsd.network/@incal/108289923434818556  <-- hot <3
>   https://bsd.network/@incal/108236726667435742  <-- altruistic
>   https://bsd.network/@incal/108258462997950026  <-- cool
>   https://bsd.network/@solene/108301260967811466 <-- patriotic
> 
> -- 
> underground experts united
> https://dataswamp.org/~incal
> 
> 
> 

Re: lamers on IRC

[Emanuel Berg]

Samuel Banya wrote:

>> Fediverse
>>
>> Client for Emacs to access Fediverse:
>>
>> martianh/mastodon.el: Emacs client for Mastodon -
>> mastodon.el - Codeberg.org
>> https://codeberg.org/martianh/mastodon.el
>
> That's awesome.
>
> Didn't know there were federated instances in this respect.

It's the old Usenet architecture but it implements FOSS social
media or something that resembles Facebook/Twitter pretty much
at least from a user perspective, this a non-Facebook/Twitter
user's perspective mind you.

That said ... uhm, a lot of people there aren't exactly ...
well, let's just say development has gone forward yet again,
but this time in certain very unexpected directions!

Anyway the architecture still makes sense even to us, don't
worry ...

  https://dataswamp.org/~incal/pimgs/comp/net-arch.png
  https://dataswamp.org/~incal/pimgs/comp/usenet.png

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: lamers on IRC

[Thomas Lord]

I wish something like this existed but with the groups/moderator
features (suitably updated) of Usenet netnews.

On 2022-05-27 17:08, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> Samuel Banya wrote:
> 
>>> Fediverse
>>> 
>>> Client for Emacs to access Fediverse:
>>> 
>>> martianh/mastodon.el: Emacs client for Mastodon -
>>> mastodon.el - Codeberg.org
>>> https://codeberg.org/martianh/mastodon.el
>> 
>> That's awesome.
>> 
>> Didn't know there were federated instances in this respect.
> 
> It's the old Usenet architecture but it implements FOSS social
> media or something that resembles Facebook/Twitter pretty much
> at least from a user perspective, this a non-Facebook/Twitter
> user's perspective mind you.
> 
> That said ... uhm, a lot of people there aren't exactly ...
> well, let's just say development has gone forward yet again,
> but this time in certain very unexpected directions!
> 
> Anyway the architecture still makes sense even to us, don't
> worry ...
> 
>   https://dataswamp.org/~incal/pimgs/comp/net-arch.png
>   https://dataswamp.org/~incal/pimgs/comp/usenet.png

Re: lamers on IRC

[Emanuel Berg]

Thomas Lord wrote:

> I wish something like this existed but with the
> groups/moderator features (suitably updated) of
> Usenet netnews.

Weren't there parallel hierarchies, one of which was moderated
and the other not so? Was that the "alt" thing? This was
before my time ...

Because then on IRC one could have

#emacs
#emacs-lamers

LOL

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: lamers on IRC

[Thomas Lord]

The wikipedia article looks at first glance to document the
alt groups correctly, as far as I recall.

The key thing to alts:  no central moderator, yes, but also
every individual host operator had the capacity to simply
not carry some.  Every user had a theoretical capacity
to operate their own host or to shop around for one who
carried the alt groups they preferred.   Of course, the whole
thing being P2P, hosts upstream of a given host could
choose to shun it and hosts could shop around for their
choice of upstream hosts.

Google used its economic power and social influence to first
centralize what was left of mainstream netnews and then to
kill it off.

I dream of a world with a few very popular hosts and lots of
tangles and tentacles of more "semi-privateish" hosts with
groups that aren't big loud public broadcasts, more or less.

-t


On 2022-05-27 21:21, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> Thomas Lord wrote:
> 
>> I wish something like this existed but with the
>> groups/moderator features (suitably updated) of
>> Usenet netnews.
> 
> Weren't there parallel hierarchies, one of which was moderated
> and the other not so? Was that the "alt" thing? This was
> before my time ...
> 
> Because then on IRC one could have
> 
> #emacs
> #emacs-lamers
> 
> LOL

Re: lamers on IRC

[Emanuel Berg]

Thomas Lord wrote:

> Every user had a theoretical capacity to operate their own
> host or to shop around for one who carried the alt groups
> they preferred. Of course, the whole thing being P2P, hosts
> upstream of a given host could choose to shun it and hosts
> could shop around for their choice of upstream hosts.

Uhm, "upstream host", is that another computer that receives
to the same feed as you so thus gets your posts or what is it?

> Google used its economic power and social influence to first
> centralize what was left of mainstream netnews and then to
> kill it off.

Well, you can tune into nntp.aioe.org with Gnus this very
instant and see how useful it is. But killed - no.

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: lamers on IRC

[Thomas Lord]

> Uhm, "upstream host", is that another computer that receives
> to the same feed as you so thus gets your posts or what is it?


Example from real life.  In high school I interned at a dinky little
start-up that was a net-news edge node.   The system administrators
at that little company set up an internal net news host the same way
someone might bring in an old ping pong table - to improve the work
environment.

That company dialed out to a more established company down the
road that, as a regional industry courtesy, not only hosted its
own internal net news host but connected to even bigger fish
upstream and casually offered peering to local small companies.


>> Google used its economic power and social influence to first
>> centralize what was left of mainstream netnews and then to
>> kill it off.
> 
> Well, you can tune into nntp.aioe.org with Gnus this very
> instant and see how useful it is. But killed - no.

Yes, I am being a bit absolutist there.

I suppose to be a little more accurate I would say that they
killed it as a way of sharing groups that had developed into
widely used global connected social media (relative to the scales of its
day).

To be sure, the not-really-multi-media email-style message format
didn't exactly help sustain interested in net news.

-t

Re: lamers on IRC

[Thomas Lord]

FWIW, a modern, p2p, group-structured system with at least pictures,
short video/audio, very basic hypertext etc... appeals to me
as a way to try to help free people from untrustworthy social
media because I think it spans a nice range of use cases.  For
example, there could be some hubs that aggregate real climate
scientists, or real music experts, or whatever -- and "everyone"
would want to get groups from those big dogs and in the same
system, local (geographic or logical "local") backwaters
could exist.   PLUS - and this is big - it would create a symbiotic
IRL social network among hosts and users.

That, not the details of history, is my main point.  I'm not
just being nostalgic (I think / hope).

-t


On 2022-05-27 22:04, Thomas Lord wrote:
>> Uhm, "upstream host", is that another computer that receives
>> to the same feed as you so thus gets your posts or what is it?
> 
> 
> Example from real life.  In high school I interned at a dinky little
> start-up that was a net-news edge node.   The system administrators
> at that little company set up an internal net news host the same way
> someone might bring in an old ping pong table - to improve the work
> environment.
> 
> That company dialed out to a more established company down the
> road that, as a regional industry courtesy, not only hosted its
> own internal net news host but connected to even bigger fish
> upstream and casually offered peering to local small companies.
> 
> 
>>> Google used its economic power and social influence to first
>>> centralize what was left of mainstream netnews and then to
>>> kill it off.
>> 
>> Well, you can tune into nntp.aioe.org with Gnus this very
>> instant and see how useful it is. But killed - no.
> 
> Yes, I am being a bit absolutist there.
> 
> I suppose to be a little more accurate I would say that they
> killed it as a way of sharing groups that had developed into
> widely used global connected social media (relative to the scales of 
> its
> day).
> 
> To be sure, the not-really-multi-media email-style message format
> didn't exactly help sustain interested in net news.
> 
> -t

Re: lamers on IRC

[Emanuel Berg]

Thomas Lord wrote:

> there could be some hubs that aggregate real climate
> scientists, or real music experts, or whatever -- and
> "everyone" would want to get groups from those big dogs and
> in the same system, local (geographic or logical "local")
> backwaters could exist. PLUS - and this is big - it would
> create a symbiotic IRL social network among hosts and users.

Indeed, wonderful. No, Mastodon isn't like that for
everyone's information.

> That, not the details of history, is my main point. I'm not
> just being nostalgic (I think / hope).

Ikr? But I don't think that will ever happen again. IRC used
to be like that but isn't anymore by far, Usenet USED to be
that way and it isn't used anymore, virtually.

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: lamers on IRC

[Emanuel Berg]

Thomas Lord wrote:

> Example from real life. In high school I interned at a dinky
> little start-up that was a net-news edge node. The system
> administrators at that little company set up an internal net
> news host the same way someone might bring in an old ping
> pong table - to improve the work environment.
>
> That company dialed out to a more established company down
> the road that, as a regional industry courtesy, not only
> hosted its own internal net news host but connected to even
> bigger fish upstream and casually offered peering to local
> small companies.

Can you explain the terms host and upstream in this context?

A host is a computer connected to Usenet and upstream is where
the data has been already, i.e. the servers?

>>> Google used its economic power and social influence to
>>> first centralize what was left of mainstream netnews and
>>> then to kill it off.
>>
>> Well, you can tune into nntp.aioe.org with Gnus this very
>> instant and see how useful it is. But killed - no.
>
> Yes, I am being a bit absolutist there.
>
> I suppose to be a little more accurate I would say that they
> killed it as a way of sharing groups that had developed into
> widely used global connected social media (relative to the
> scales of its day).
>
> To be sure, the not-really-multi-media email-style message
> format didn't exactly help sustain interested in net news.

I've heard the so called binary groups (which contained
multimedia) were part of the reason of the fall in popular use
since people were sharing files - so not the least XXX rated
movies - to the extent it ate up most of the bandwidth while
there still wasn't a monetary incentive to keep providing the
service, from the ISP's POV ...

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: lamers on IRC

[Thomas Lord]

> > Can you explain the terms host and upstream in this context?

Although individual posts flow in both directions between peers,
in practice, some nodes emerged, the main function of which was
to form a kind of high bandwidth backbone carrying all the
net-work wide popular groups, and offering peering to many peripheral
nodes.

To continue the example: at the little start-up I worked at,
they didn't try to carry all the groups available at the time.
They carried some obvious groups (such as comp.lang.c, about the
C programming language) and, beyond those core groups, they would
add anything someone asked for and that the big "upstream" peer had.

The big upstream peer got most of its very large set of groups to
choose from by peering with other big hosts.  They also carried
back posts from "edge nodes" to the rest of the world.

The p2p software - that today might easily be replaced with something
close to rsync(1) - saw peers as symmetric.   The IRL social network
operating netnews recognized the big-iron/big-pipes/serves-many
"upstream" as different from the local hosts/low activity/selected 
groups
"downstream".   Maybe a bit like how the logical functions
of Internet routers are symmetrical, but an upstream/downstream
topology emerges on the basis of the physical network and who
is connected where.

> I've heard the so called binary groups (which contained
> multimedia) were part of the reason of the fall in popular use
> since people were sharing files - so not the least XXX rated
> movies - to the extent it ate up most of the bandwidth while
> there still wasn't a monetary incentive to keep providing the
> service, from the ISP's POV ...

My initial encounter with net news did not involve ISPs or
the IP protocol.   It was company X's computers running
a cron script to dial up and log in to computers at company Y.
(Some others at the same time were already peering over the
Arpanet.)

But porn. Yes. There were mostly-multi-media porn groups that
were about anything but instant gratification.   Because of
limitations to 7 bit ASCII and posts of short sizes,
big images, etc. were broken down into pieces, each piece
encoded in base 64, and a series posted of message like:

    Subject: tee hee, naked person pic 1/42
    Subject: tee hee, naken person pic 2/42
    .... etc.

and of course it was always possible for posts to get
dropped in transit so a user might end up collecting
all but 2 of the "tee he, naked person" posts and
thus be unable to reconstruct the compressed file that
when manually reassembled could be viewed to see what
people look like naked.

That probably has something to do with the popularity,
back then, of alt.sex.stories -- kinky short stories written
in plain ASCII.

The limitations on message formats and size were more a
feature than a bug.   Net news ran robustly and well over
fairly low bandwidth connections.  It did not require
the Internet (but could easily use the Internet).

And yes, hosts could censor - e.g. just decide not to
receive or forward the porn groups.   This was impossible
to prevent and so nobody tried to prevent it.  It was
common in practice (for example, blocking porn from a
workplace).   The answer to censorship was for more
liberal people to create more peers -- to "route around" the
blockages if that's what someone wanted to do.

Editorializing a bit:  the anarchic operating procedures
and resilience enough to work over p2p dial-up, terminal
wires, whatever seem to me like extremely desirable features
for communications infrastructure in precarious times
when it wouldn't be *that* surprising to see major disruptions
of the global Internet, of the big commercial servers, etc.

-t


On 2022-05-28 08:08, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> Thomas Lord wrote:
> 
>> Example from real life. In high school I interned at a dinky
>> little start-up that was a net-news edge node. The system
>> administrators at that little company set up an internal net
>> news host the same way someone might bring in an old ping
>> pong table - to improve the work environment.
>> 
>> That company dialed out to a more established company down
>> the road that, as a regional industry courtesy, not only
>> hosted its own internal net news host but connected to even
>> bigger fish upstream and casually offered peering to local
>> small companies.
> 
> Can you explain the terms host and upstream in this context?
> 
> A host is a computer connected to Usenet and upstream is where
> the data has been already, i.e. the servers?
> 
>>>> Google used its economic power and social influence to
>>>> first centralize what was left of mainstream netnews and
>>>> then to kill it off.
>>> 
>>> Well, you can tune into nntp.aioe.org with Gnus this very
>>> instant and see how useful it is. But killed - no.
>> 
>> Yes, I am being a bit absolutist there.
>> 
>> I suppose to be a little more accurate I would say that they
>> killed it as a way of sharing groups that had developed into
>> widely used global connected social media (relative to the
>> scales of its day).
>> 
>> To be sure, the not-really-multi-media email-style message
>> format didn't exactly help sustain interested in net news.
> 
> I've heard the so called binary groups (which contained
> multimedia) were part of the reason of the fall in popular use
> since people were sharing files - so not the least XXX rated
> movies - to the extent it ate up most of the bandwidth while
> there still wasn't a monetary incentive to keep providing the
> service, from the ISP's POV ...

Re: lamers on IRC

[Emanuel Berg]

Thomas Lord wrote:

> Although individual posts flow in both directions between
> peers, in practice, some nodes emerged, the main function of
> which was to form a kind of high bandwidth backbone carrying
> all the net-work wide popular groups, and offering peering
> to many peripheral nodes.
>
> To continue the example: at the little start-up I worked at,
> they didn't try to carry all the groups available at the
> time. They carried some obvious groups (such as comp.lang.c,
> about the C programming language) and, beyond those core
> groups, they would add anything someone asked for and that
> the big "upstream" peer had.
>
> The big upstream peer got most of its very large set of
> groups to choose from by peering with other big hosts.
> They also carried back posts from "edge nodes" to the rest
> of the world.
>
> The p2p software - that today might easily be replaced with
> something close to rsync(1) - saw peers as symmetric.
> The IRL social network operating netnews recognized the
> big-iron/big-pipes/serves-many "upstream" as different from
> the local hosts/low activity/selected groups "downstream".
> Maybe a bit like how the logical functions of Internet
> routers are symmetrical, but an upstream/downstream topology
> emerges on the basis of the physical network and who is
> connected where.

Got it, 

inner node = server, upstream

edge node = host (client), downstream

but in theory the server could act as a host and the host as
a server?

>> I've heard the so called binary groups (which contained
>> multimedia) were part of the reason of the fall in popular
>> use since people were sharing files - so not the least XXX
>> rated movies - to the extent it ate up most of the
>> bandwidth while there still wasn't a monetary incentive to
>> keep providing the service, from the ISP's POV ...
>
> My initial encounter with net news did not involve ISPs or
> the IP protocol. It was company X's computers running a cron
> script to dial up and log in to computers at company Y.
> (Some others at the same time were already peering over
> the Arpanet.)

So how did that happen if not the Internet, telephone line
and UUCP? 

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: lamers on IRC

[Thomas Lord]

>>    My initial encounter with net news did not involve ISPs or
>>    the IP protocol. It was company X's computers running a cron
>>    script to dial up and log in to computers at company Y.
>>    (Some others at the same time were already peering over
>>    the Arpanet.)

> So how did that happen if not the Internet, telephone line
> and UUCP?

UUCP was used over landlines, with fast (for the day)
modems.   For connecting systems that are physically close
(like, same machine room), the modem and telephone wires
could be omitted to use just rs232 lines directly.

That's why I say, today, to build a P2P social network it
would be sensible to start with something like (perhaps
exactly like) rsync(1) and handle live chat and streaming
separately.

Not limited to social networks, either.  Wouldn't it be interesting
if, say, wikipedia were (search features notwithstanding) just
a static set of files you'd cache widely using rsync, submitting
patches to pages using some kind of low-tech distributed, decentralized
revision control system?   So much resiliance.  So much non-reliance
on any specific network technology.  Such simplicity.  ;-)

-t



On 2022-05-28 09:54, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> Thomas Lord wrote:
> 
>> Although individual posts flow in both directions between
>> peers, in practice, some nodes emerged, the main function of
>> which was to form a kind of high bandwidth backbone carrying
>> all the net-work wide popular groups, and offering peering
>> to many peripheral nodes.
>> 
>> To continue the example: at the little start-up I worked at,
>> they didn't try to carry all the groups available at the
>> time. They carried some obvious groups (such as comp.lang.c,
>> about the C programming language) and, beyond those core
>> groups, they would add anything someone asked for and that
>> the big "upstream" peer had.
>> 
>> The big upstream peer got most of its very large set of
>> groups to choose from by peering with other big hosts.
>> They also carried back posts from "edge nodes" to the rest
>> of the world.
>> 
>> The p2p software - that today might easily be replaced with
>> something close to rsync(1) - saw peers as symmetric.
>> The IRL social network operating netnews recognized the
>> big-iron/big-pipes/serves-many "upstream" as different from
>> the local hosts/low activity/selected groups "downstream".
>> Maybe a bit like how the logical functions of Internet
>> routers are symmetrical, but an upstream/downstream topology
>> emerges on the basis of the physical network and who is
>> connected where.
> 
> Got it,
> 
> inner node = server, upstream
> 
> edge node = host (client), downstream
> 
> but in theory the server could act as a host and the host as
> a server?
> 
>>> I've heard the so called binary groups (which contained
>>> multimedia) were part of the reason of the fall in popular
>>> use since people were sharing files - so not the least XXX
>>> rated movies - to the extent it ate up most of the
>>> bandwidth while there still wasn't a monetary incentive to
>>> keep providing the service, from the ISP's POV ...
>> 
>> My initial encounter with net news did not involve ISPs or
>> the IP protocol. It was company X's computers running a cron
>> script to dial up and log in to computers at company Y.
>> (Some others at the same time were already peering over
>> the Arpanet.)
> 
> So how did that happen if not the Internet, telephone line
> and UUCP?

Re: lamers on IRC

[Emanuel Berg]

Thomas Lord wrote:

>>> My initial encounter with net news did not involve ISPs or
>>> the IP protocol. It was company X's computers running
>>> a cron script to dial up and log in to computers at
>>> company Y. (Some others at the same time were already
>>> peering over the Arpanet.)
>>
>> So how did that happen if not the Internet, telephone line
>> and UUCP?
>
> UUCP was used over landlines, with fast (for the day)
> modems. For connecting systems that are physically close
> (like, same machine room), the modem and telephone wires
> could be omitted to use just rs232 lines directly.

  In telecommunications, RS-232 or Recommended Standard 232 is
  a standard originally introduced in 1960 for serial
  communication transmission of data. It formally defines
  signals connecting between a DTE (data terminal equipment)
  such as a computer terminal, and a DCE (data
  circuit-terminating equipment or data communication
  equipment), such as a modem.
  <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RS-232>

Hm ... :)

> That's why I say, today, to build a P2P social network it
> would be sensible to start with something like (perhaps
> exactly like) rsync(1) and handle live chat and
> streaming separately.

I think everyone agrees rsync is great ...

> Not limited to social networks, either. Wouldn't it be
> interesting if, say, wikipedia were (search features
> notwithstanding) just a static set of files you'd cache
> widely using rsync, submitting patches to pages using some
> kind of low-tech distributed, decentralized revision control
> system? So much resiliance. So much non-reliance on any
> specific network technology. Such simplicity. ;-)

Maybe too decentralized for capitalism?

But with the Fediverse you have it, or sort of at least, I'm
not sure you'd like the services they provide or the style in
which it is provided.

I guess I like it fine - so far? But it's very limited ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pldftoUbM80

To stay in the 1960s ...

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: lamers on IRC

[Emanuel Berg]

>   In telecommunications, RS-232 or Recommended Standard 232
>   is a standard originally introduced in 1960 for serial
>   communication transmission of data. It formally defines
>   signals connecting between a DTE (data terminal equipment)
>   such as a computer terminal, and a DCE (data
>   circuit-terminating equipment or data communication
>   equipment), such as a modem.
>   <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RS-232>
>
> Hm ... :)

No, I get it, rs232 was used for very short distances (e.g.,
same room), UUCP was used for long distances on landlines.

I added rs232 to my computer history file, the one other entry
from the year 1960 is fittingly ALGOL 60, the
machine-independent algorithmic language ...

https://dataswamp.org/~incal/COMP-HIST
https://dataswamp.org/~incal/sth/scripts/hist
https://dataswamp.org/~incal/#sth

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: lamers on IRC

[Thomas Lord]

Kinda.  RS232 was used in both the nearby and long
distance cases.  In the long distance cases it is
used to make a physically short connection to the local
modem.

If you are connecting two computers directly this way,
one of them is assuming a terminal is connected, the
other is pretending to be a terminal.

Computer A (acting as if it is a terminal) logs in to computer B
and runs a program that speaks uucp.  They move files
using that protocol over a terminal connection.

See:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Null_modem

>  But with the Fediverse you have it,

Not at all - that's a very different system for a
fairly narrow set of purposes, but I'll drop it.

-t



On 2022-05-29 17:07, Emanuel Berg wrote:
>>   In telecommunications, RS-232 or Recommended Standard 232
>>   is a standard originally introduced in 1960 for serial
>>   communication transmission of data. It formally defines
>>   signals connecting between a DTE (data terminal equipment)
>>   such as a computer terminal, and a DCE (data
>>   circuit-terminating equipment or data communication
>>   equipment), such as a modem.
>>   <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RS-232>
>> 
>> Hm ... :)
> 
> No, I get it, rs232 was used for very short distances (e.g.,
> same room), UUCP was used for long distances on landlines.
> 
> I added rs232 to my computer history file, the one other entry
> from the year 1960 is fittingly ALGOL 60, the
> machine-independent algorithmic language ...
> 
> https://dataswamp.org/~incal/COMP-HIST
> https://dataswamp.org/~incal/sth/scripts/hist
> https://dataswamp.org/~incal/#sth

Re: lamers on IRC

[Emanuel Berg]

Thomas Lord wrote:

>> But with the Fediverse you have it,
>
> Not at all - that's a very different system for a fairly
> narrow set of purposes, but I'll drop it.

They call the architecture with many servers a federation but
it's the same as the Usenet one, see these images

  https://dataswamp.org/~incal/pimgs/comp/net-arch.png
  https://dataswamp.org/~incal/pimgs/comp/usenet.png

So while in theory it is total P2P in practice it is
client-server only there are many servers that themselves
share information, or temporarily acts as clients if you will.

It's the old redundance and propagation scheme all over.

So then the Fediverse (a concept) is the whole set based on
this network idea, and the Mastodon "instances" (servers) that
offer a FOSS Facebook/Twitter-ish service is just one service
of many possible, albeit one that has been realized.

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: lamers on IRC

[Thomas Lord]

If your line of reasoning were true, it
would mean that all forms of peer-to-peer
networking are "the same" aside from "style".



-t


On 2022-05-29 19:24, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> Thomas Lord wrote:
> 
>>> But with the Fediverse you have it,
>> 
>> Not at all - that's a very different system for a fairly
>> narrow set of purposes, but I'll drop it.
> 
> They call the architecture with many servers a federation but
> it's the same as the Usenet one, see these images
> 
>   https://dataswamp.org/~incal/pimgs/comp/net-arch.png
>   https://dataswamp.org/~incal/pimgs/comp/usenet.png
> 
> So while in theory it is total P2P in practice it is
> client-server only there are many servers that themselves
> share information, or temporarily acts as clients if you will.
> 
> It's the old redundance and propagation scheme all over.
> 
> So then the Fediverse (a concept) is the whole set based on
> this network idea, and the Mastodon "instances" (servers) that
> offer a FOSS Facebook/Twitter-ish service is just one service
> of many possible, albeit one that has been realized.

Re: lamers on IRC

[Emanuel Berg]

> They call the architecture with many servers a federation
> but
> it's the same as the Usenet one, see these images
>
>   https://dataswamp.org/~incal/pimgs/comp/net-arch.png
>   https://dataswamp.org/~incal/pimgs/comp/usenet.png
>
> So while in theory it is total P2P in practice it is
> client-server only there are many servers that themselves
> share information, or temporarily acts as clients if you
> will.
>
> It's the old redundance and propagation scheme all
> over.
>
> So then the Fediverse (a concept) is the whole set based on
> this network idea, and the Mastodon "instances" (servers)
> that offer a FOSS Facebook/Twitter-ish service is just one
> service of many possible, albeit one that has been realized.

I got a private mail from a clever little individual, it says

  Fediverse is really a federated network on which some
  services are built, like Mastodon (which has replacement
  implementations like pixelfed, pleroma or honk).

  There is peertube as a youtube equivalent, I know there is
  also an alternative to that proprietary network
  with pictures.

  It's possible to exchange information between the services
  with various results. From my experience, a peertube video
  release can be published on mastodon from peertube, comments
  done on the video will appear as a thread in mastodon.
  You can follow a peertube account using mastodon.

  I have no idea if the opposite is true, i.e.
  following a mastodon account using a peertube account, that
  doesn't make sense I think.

No, I don't think it does! :)

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: lamers on IRC

[Emanuel Berg]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 88 bytes --]

Here, more convenient:

  https://dataswamp.org/~incal/pimgs/comp/fediverse-usenet.png


[-- Attachment #2: fediverse-usenet.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 58410 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 61 bytes --]


-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: lamers on IRC

[Jean Louis]

You mean because Usenet is decentralized and replicated? That is similarity with Fediverse.

I think news servers are so much more accessible and more sane, than Fediverse, as topics we sorted, and there are threads, Fediverse is poor on that, on the other hand, it needs browser which is easier accessible to people of today than special applications.

And yes, I consider that people don't get smarter with time due to influence by large corporations. 

That what you said is exactly my opinion too.




>It's the old Usenet architecture but it implements FOSS social
>media or something that resembles Facebook/Twitter pretty much
>at least from a user perspective, this a non-Facebook/Twitter
>user's perspective mind you.


Jean

Re: lamers on IRC

[Emanuel Berg]

Jean Louis wrote:

> You mean because Usenet is decentralized and replicated?
> That is similarity with Fediverse.

Fediverse is like Usenet (Usenet was first) but that's under
the hood, the architecture, a backend issue or whatever you
want to call it. The way the Fediverse is used is absolutely
unlike the group hierarchies of Usenet (and today Gnus with
Gmane) and it's not just an interface thing alltho the
interface obviously is completely different as well.

> I think news servers are so much more accessible and more
> sane, than Fediverse, as topics we sorted, and there are
> threads, Fediverse is poor on that, on the other hand, it
> needs browser which is easier accessible to people of today
> than special applications.

There is an app for smartphone use, Tusky, but the web
interface is better in terms of features.

> And yes, I consider that people don't get smarter with time
> due to influence by large corporations.

Well, it's complicated ...

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: lamers on IRC

[Jean Louis]

* Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> [2022-05-27 18:07]:
>   https://bsd.network/@incal/108289923434818556  <-- hot <3
>   https://bsd.network/@incal/108236726667435742  <-- altruistic
>   https://bsd.network/@incal/108258462997950026  <-- cool
>   https://bsd.network/@solene/108301260967811466 <-- patriotic

OK, I hope we will be friends even if our political view points differ.

-- 
Jean

Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns:
https://www.fsf.org/campaigns

In support of Richard M. Stallman
https://stallmansupport.org/

Re: lamers on IRC

[Emanuel Berg]

Jean Louis wrote:

>> https://bsd.network/@incal/108289923434818556  <-- hot <3
>> https://bsd.network/@incal/108236726667435742  <-- altruistic
>> https://bsd.network/@incal/108258462997950026  <-- cool
>> https://bsd.network/@solene/108301260967811466 <-- patriotic
>
> OK, I hope we will be friends even if our political view
> points differ.

I don't know, what you don't think she's attractive?

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: lamers on IRC

[Emanuel Berg]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 307 bytes --]

> And that's even a weird thing to say since it isn't an Emacs
> place, you can hashtag #emacs for all the luck it'll bring
> you but that's it ...

Good idea!

https://bsd.network/@incal/108377570039873131

https://dataswamp.org/~incal/figures/fireworks-over-toronto.png
https://dataswamp.org/~incal/#sth


[-- Attachment #2: fireworks-over-toronto.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 4960 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 61 bytes --]


-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: lamers on IRC

[Byung-Hee HWANG]

Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> writes:

> (... thanks ...)
> https://dataswamp.org/~incal/#sth

sth.py is so cool! Nice code!!

Sincerely, Gnus fan Byung-Hee

-- 
^고맙습니다 _布德天下_ 감사합니다_^))//

Re: lamers on IRC

[Emanuel Berg]

Byung-Hee HWANG wrote:

>> https://dataswamp.org/~incal/#sth
>
> sth.py is so cool! Nice code!!

I don't know ... maybe :)

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal