Yeah, really great news: more vertical integration for higher walls around those gardens. And, as usual, the majority of hackernews is celebrating this as a win and will happily shovel more money into the pockets of tax evasion and anti-competitions champions, privacy invaders, and polluters.
Honestly, some people legit scare me when they're talking about ARM/RISC-V. They usually have very little relevant knowledge/experience in the field (some don't even know what an ISA really is) yet worship these architectures like they're the second coming of Jesus.
It really is easy to brainwash people en-masse.
I think introducing a law to require open documentation plus repairability at launch, and open-source+hardware at EOL (maybe even before say 5 years after launch) could work. Businesses keeping their secrets to make a profit and get a head start for a while is OK - it should create competition. Driving pollution with e-waste through forced obsolescence is not.
> The lesson? There’s no tool, however well designed, that can bring pure reason to politics.
The whole article is just slamming an attempt at improving the situation without suggesting any improvements. It's the typical "Hah! Look! They tried! Idiots!".
Do you think you're going to be able to convince the bricklayer, that just came back home after 8 hours of work and 2 total hours in traffic, to spend several hours reading up on a party's + candidate's history, political stance, ideology, scandals, in-depth interviews, program, and so on an so forth for every party available?
We should be happy that these things at least exist and try to aid people when making these decisions, instead of belittling them (the tools and their makers) and calling the whole thing futile. At least there are attempts to counter (at least a little bit) the deluge of opinions, misquotes, misinformation, faux news, deception and lies, that are spread, facilitated and guided on and by social networks.
If WebRTC is activated in your browser and webtorrent (https://webtorrent.io/) is being used by the instance, yes. However, you could say the same for Zoom or most video calling platform, if I'm not mistaken.
Most video calling platforms only expose you to the actual people you are calling which is generally a non issue. Torrents have a public list of all content and all hosts with what content they hold. This is required for peer discovery and it means that a malicious party can just suck up the whole DHT and create a database of every video each IP address watched.
WebTorrent (https://webtorrent.io/) is built upon WebRTC, but I believe PeerTube should fallback to simple HTTP mp4. There is a download link handy that you can open in the browser, vlc, mpv or your favorite video player.
I'm not sure webtorrent have a way to do peer exchange without centralised trackers like e.g Bittorrents PEX does, so if the core websocket trackers go down, are peers still able to share lists of known peers with each other or is the peer discovery centralised to the webtorrent/websocket trackers?
https://tilvids.com/ has some buffering but was much better compared to other links in this page. I guess the other sites dont have lot of peers in Australia.
Even if a specific video doesn't have a lot of peers, people can setup a server close to you to replicate popular instances you'd like to ease access to.
So you could have a peertube.au instance dedicated to seeding content from other instances on an opt-in basis (instance following other instances, and giving them a certain disk quota).
Not that it seems to do much. Every time I have used it I have only been connected to the server peer. I doubt there are many people with an active tab open for a particular video.
It may be because noone else was watching that video, or because your browser doesn't support WebRTC, or because your browser blocked the 3rd party request to the STUN server for peer discovery. In any case, the server could and should have other peer instances seed its content ; if that's not the case, you could contact the instance admin and suggest they get that kind of replication going to ease distribution.
Freenet feels very similar to IPFS, but it differs under the hood. On Freenet the network itself is the data store, you don't host your own files, you upload them and they spread over the network. If you go offline, the files still remain on the network. On IPFS on the other side you are storing your own files and the network is just used for lookup and caching. Everything on Freenet is also encrypted, so you don't get the content-addressability benefits (e.g. dedup) you get on IPFS.
It'll go to random nodes, and if those chunks have zero popularity they'll get discarded pretty quickly. The exact details would depend on client settings but probably don't matter for a general answer.
For content that is never accessed, you have lifetimes between 2 weeks (bigger than 4 MiB) and 3 months (smaller than 2kiB).
Content that is accessed regularly can stay around indefinitely.
Some of the sites of Freenet are older than a decade and still working well.
To see the actual measurements, you need to run Freenet and access the fetch-pull-stats: USK@lwR9sLnZD3QHveZa1FB0dAHgeck~dFNBg368mY09wSU,0Vq~4FXSUj1-op3QdzqjZsIvrNMYWlnSdUwCl-Z1fYA,AQACAAE/fetchpullstats/537/
It depends on the configuration of the server. Some disable Webtorrent (probably because it doesn't support HLS). When they do that then I think it pulls from the federation, which then depends on how many have mirrored it.
Please not mailinglists. They are unbrowsable and who likes getting their inbox spammed in order to follow a discussion?
What's more, not everybody follows etiquette:
- reply and just keep the original message at the bottom
- reply in between the original message
- reply at the bottom with the original message on top
- Some mix quotes and then reply to some parts in the original
And then how do you link to users or messages from your email client?
Plus who wants to have 5 different email accounts for 5 different mailing-lists? And why would I respond in a manner that allows the world to see my private email address?
I heavily disagree that emails are the way forward in this regard (maybe even in any regard).
> Plus who wants to have 5 different email accounts for 5 different mailing-lists? And why would I respond in a manner that allows the world to see my private email address
You seem confused. Signing up to multiple mailing lists won’t require you to have multiple email addresses, and at the same time they don’t require you to subscribe using your main email address either. Many email hosts will give you as many mailboxes as you like, either using plus–addresses or just new mailbox names.
> And then how do you link to users or messages from your email client?
Every email has a unique message id. Simply include a message id in the body of the email, and your email client should turn it into a link (provided you happen to have that message available). If your email client doesn’t do that, perhaps you need a better email client.
> They are unbrowsable and who likes getting their inbox spammed in order to follow a discussion?
It really sounds like you need a better email client, or you just need to learn how to use the one you have better.
>It really sounds like you need a better email client, or you just need to learn how to use the one you have better.
I have heard this sentiment a lot and tried a lot of email clients and personally I still don't enjoy using any email client for this task. A properly designed forum software is always going to be easier to use for its express purpose than a mail client.
Could you make some recommendations then? You are kind of just grand standing, because it looks like you are absolutely right, but as some one who likes what you are talking about I don't know much more than I did before.
I use Gnus, which does this. It automatically turns message ids into links in both the headers and the body of the message.
It has some restrictions that I occasionally want to relax though. It doesn’t keep a complete database of all message ids it has seen in your inbox, just a list of the ones it most recently pulled into a summary. For example, if you pull up a summary that includes the latest 100 messages in your INBOX, then the links will take you to any message within those 100, but clicking on a link to a message older than that just tells you that it can’t find the message id in the summary.
