Whether you’re really passionate about RPC, MQTT, Matrix or wayland, tell us more about the protocols or open standards you have strong opinions on!
I was actually surprised to find out QUIC is fairly close to being default.
Wikipedia
HTTP/3 uses QUIC, a multiplexed transport protocol built on UDP.
HTTP/3 is (at least partially) supported by 97% of tracked web browser installations (thereof of 98% of “tracked mobile” web browsers), and 29% of the top 10 million websites.
RSS (RDF Site Summary or Really Simple Syndication) It is in use a fair amount, but it is usually buried. Many people don’t know it exists and because of that I am afraid it will one day go away.
I find it a great simple way to stay up to date across multiple web sites the way I want to (on my terms, not theirs) By the way, it works on Lemmy to :)
Honestly there is rarely a blog I want to follow that doesn’t have it. I do think it would be great to have more readers using it so that it becomes more significant, but for my reading it is actually pretty great.
I2P. Current protocols should go through it
removed by mod
Anonymous lemmy, anonymous torrents, anonymous IPFS, anonymous eMule, anonymous streaming, anonymous source forges, anonymous chats, anonymous everything…
Imagine unbridled, anonymous, mainstream piracy, software development, sitehosting, communication, social media.
i2p is pretty cool. One of the more interesting projects out there. Like tor, though i’m preferential to the weird ones.
there is also GNUNET which seems to be in perpetual development, perhaps one day that will see something interesting happen.
FTP
Seriously guys, let’s share files the old fashioned way. Without bullshit.
TOML
deleted by creator
[…] nobody uses SIP…
Say what?
In my part of the world signaling for literally every phone call, be it mobile or fixed, traverses networks and operators using SIP.
deleted by creator
Markdown. Its only in tech-spaces that its preferred, but it should be used everywhere. You can even write full books and academic papers in markdown (maybe with only a few extensions like latex / mathjax).
Instead, in a lot of fields, people are passing around variants of microsoft word documents with weird formatting and no standardization around headings, quotes, and comments.
Depends on the type of book. Since you need HTML for all non default styles. Therefore, it raises the bar… you need a bit of web dev knowledge which removes the biggest benefit of markdown: simplicity / ease of use.
Markdown is awesome, I agree! I did not realize you could extend markdown with anything other than html. The html extension is quite nice to do anything that markdown doesn’t support natively, but I wish there was an easier way to extend markdown. Maybe the ones you listed are what I need.
Hedgedoc / hackmd support a good amount of extensions out of the box. I think typora and obsidias do also (but not open source).
I frigging love markdown for everything!
My main wishlist for markdown, is a better live collaborative markdown editor. Hedgedoc works, but it’s showing it’s age, and they don’t seem to be getting close to releasing v2.
Etherpad also has a markdown extension, but it doesn’t import / export that well.
Man, I’ve written three novels plus assorted shorter form stories in markdown.
There’s a learning curve, but once you get going, it’s so fluid. The problem is that when it comes time to format for release, you have to convert to something else, and not every word processor can handle markdown. It’s extra work, but worth it, imo.
For sure, I bet full fledged editors like word don’t even let you import it.
Not correctly, no. Librewriter does a bit better, but still misses some bits
Just set up pandoc and Bob’s your uncle. It’ll convert markdown to anything. You’ll never have to open another word processor.
Nice! Thanks for the tip!
Edit: holy shit, how have I never run across that before? That’s a brilliant program right there.
Pandoc + [your markdown editor of choice] is magic. Some editors even come with Pandoc as a dependency so you can export to more or less anything from the GUI. I think GhostWriter and Zettlr at least (I honestly can’t be sure, I’ve changed editors so often and now I just have some Pandoc conversion scripts in my file manager menu).
Silly question why can’t you convert markdown to PDF and pass that to publishers?
Because it isn’t doc is docx.
Publishers are pissy about such things. Even self publishing (which is what I do now), the various outlets still have limits to what they will use. Amazon accepts something like three file formats, including their own, and pdf isn’t on the list.
I could just do pdf for directly giving them away to people, but even then, epub is usually a better pick in terms of readability since that’s the standard for actual books since ereaders tend to display it better than pdfs. Most people reading books via files would be using something that can give a better experience with epub vs pdf.
I agree 💯
Markdown is terrible as a standard because every parser works differently and when you try to standardize it (CommonMark, etc.), you find out that there are a bajillion edge cases, leading to an extremely bloated specification.
Agreed in principle, but in practice, I find it’s rarely a problem.
While editing, we pick an export tool for all editors and stick to it.
Once the document is stable, we export it to HTML or PDF and it’ll be stable forever.
Most ppl have settled on Commonmark luckily, including us.
Have you read the CommonMark specification? It’s very complex for a language that’s supposed to be lightweight.
What’s the alternative? We either have everything specified well, or we’ll have a million slightly incompatible implementations. I’ll take the big specification. At least it’s not HTML5.
An alternative would be a language with a simpler syntax. Something like XML, but less verbose.
And then we’ll be back to a hundred slightly incompatible versions. You need detailed specifications to avoid that. Why not stick to markdown?
Not if the language is standardized from the start.
Commonmark leaves some stuff like tables unspecified. That creates the need for another layer like GFM or mistletoe. Standardization is not a strong point for markdown.
I believe commonmark tries to specify a minimum baseline spec, and doesn’t try to to expand beyond that. It can be frustrating bc we’d like to see tables, superscripts, spoilers, and other things standardized, but I can see why they’d want to keep things minimal.
Asciidoc is a good example of why everything should be standardized. While markdown has multiple implementations, any document is tied to just one implementation. Asciidoc has just one implementation. But when the standard is ready, you should be able to switch implementations seamlessly.
It is too basic. I guess something more full-fledged like… typst?
Typst is a typesetting format - an alternative to LaTeX. Asciidoc is more of a competitor to markdown.
Learning that currently.
ReST (restructured text) is a good middle ground. I just wish it had more support outside of the python community. It could use some new/better tooling than Sphinx
I think Obsidian and Logseq are helping to change this.
XMPP
Why is that preferable over Matrix?
It’s kinda more resposive than Matrix for me.
Yeah, my experience with Element and a Matrix.org account is that it’s sluggish. However, it’s been better at Beeper, so I’m uncertain whether it’s intrinsic to Matrix or merely Matrix.org and/or Element’s servers.
Matrix came 15 years after XMPP, so the question should be: why is Matrix preferable? Does it bring anything to the table, other than fragmentation?
I don’t believe that its existence causes more fragmentation than it remediates. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36939482 explains why I consider Matrix fundamentally superior most (if not all) uses, although in practice it’s because the clients (Element and FluffyChat primarily) are cross-platform and support a generally uniform set of features, in comparison to the aged (but glorious) Pidgin, and its counterparts.
Your hackernews post and the fact you mention Pidgin shows that you haven’t used xmpp in the last 10 years. By the time Matrix was first released, xmpp had history sync.
Which is why I can’t wrap my head around why a second protocol with no features that didn’t already exist in XMPP took over.
I used it yesterday, via Pidgin. I’m
[email protected]. Why else would I have referenced it? Don’t tell me what I’ve done. That’s not a way to have productive conversations.Regardless, I can’t provide any more technical insight than that - I know solely that the clients provide so much more functionality that irrespective of the protocol, it’s better in practice. Fedora, openSUSE, the Bundeswehr, NATO, and Beeper - all chose Matrix over XMPP, not least partially because of Element (which they also all chose).
finger [email protected]xmpp (jabber)
OpenTelemetry and in particular I wish more protocols had Traceparent propagation support and more software had support for sending spans and traces to an OTLP endpoint to construct a full picture of everything that is going on in a distributed system.
I wish my employer just accepted my push to use OAuth…
Others have said already, but XMPP and RSS. Also, nobody mentioned NNTP yet.
I wish everything was accessible by NNTP and we had better NNTP clients. NNTP is like RSS but for forums (so, Lemmy, Reddit, or anything where you could reply to posts). Download for offline reading, read in your client, define your own formatting, sorting, filtering, your client, your rules.
If Lemmy was accessible via NNTP, I could just download all posts and comments I’m interested in and reply to them without any connection, and my replies would get synced with the server later when I connect to WiFi or something.
Probably it would be better to edit my comment, but I’ll go with a reply to myself.
To all fans of RSS: there’s this service called FeedBase that is essentially a RSS to NNTP gate. You add your RSS feed to that and it becomes a newsgroup on their server, and you can subscribe to it using any NNTP client. New articles appear as new posts in that newsgroup and you can post your own replies to them. So, you get RSS but with discussions or comments.
If you try this, let me know what RSS feeds you’re reading, so we could read the articles together and have some discussion there!
P.S. This comment is not an ad. I genuinely love feedbase and use that myself.
Holy cow, that’s neat as hell! Thanks for sharing!
Back in the day I was a big Usenet fan. What’s the modern solution to the spam issue? At the time, folk wisdom was that the demise was being caused by spam, and that due to the nature of the protocol it was somehwhat unsolveable.
I also wonder to what extent activity pub is the barrier to offline use? For reddit, the Slide client had offline reading and iirc posting. I have been disappointed it isn’t available for Lemmy. My guess has been it simply isn’t a priority for the devs. Maybe eventually we will get it.
I think it would be cool if RSS got put into Lemmy clients. Example you could make a unified inbox for all accounts by automatically getting the private RSS for incoming messages for all logged in accounts. I have manually set this up a couple of times but its tedious. Completely lacks smoothness when it comes to clicking a link, replying etc. But a client could add a little finesse to fix that.
True, Lemmy (and activitypub in general) could integrate RSS and also be accessible via NNTP.
Or at least add some functionality for offline reading/posting. It’s just not a priority for devs now.
About spam, most of spam was coming from Google groups and since Google unpeered from Usenet, there is no spam.
Content addressable protocols are better for asynchronous use. I’d like to see a proper bluesky atprotocol fork with “post lexicons” properly adapted for forums, they’re built on top of content addressing and public key based account IDs along with 3rd party moderation tooling support integrated and custom 3rd party feeds/views.
definitely some alternative internet mesh routing standart, just imagine if every device with wifi or ethernet could just extend the network without relying on an isp, yeah they could still serve as a fast backbone, but they just wouldn’t be needed and no disaster could really ever disrupt the whole internet again
i2p. It’s sorta like Tor, but the way that every user is a node provides some advantages over Tor.
A few years ago there was a Lemmy instance on I2P
was? so it’s not anymore?
Yea I think it shut down due to lack of users/interest. This was before Lemmy even had federation working, so much smaller community
Oh damn, I didn’t even know lemmy didn’t have federation at first
Also the user interface and builtin solutions for torrenting, hosting, address booking make it way more user friendly for people to start using I find.
so would you be able to run ipfs under i2p to have a secure and private ipfs?
Technically yes by rewriting ipfs’s code, but due to ipfs’s flaws you would be better off using something like freenet/hyphanet which has been designed for that purpose and has been successfully running since 2000, with the added benefit that the data is actually stored in the network by others instead of just by you (at least when you often request the data)
