Try Orgzly with Emacs Orgmode

Emacs Orgmode

emacs org-mode publish

https://orgmode.org/worg/org-tutorials/org-publish-html-tutorial.html

codeberg

it’s like github but non-corporate free software

it’s very polished and featurful

it’s built upon/by the same devs as forgejo, which is open tech to self host your own git server (with federation potentially coming), so supporting one supports the other

guix home reconfigure home-config.scm

I had the same thought lol

Metroidvanias of knowledge a la Outer Wilds

Have you heard something recent? I feel Signal has been saying that for years now.

I don’t care about XMPP as a protocol versus some other messaging protocol much, but I care a fair bit about the wdespread adoption of federated XMPP

I don’t quite understand what this means, could you elaborate?

if this service using this protocol becomes very popular, will the service seek to eliminate the open role of the protocol

That is a valid concern, though the point of the article is to try and convince people why it won’t happen like it did with Google or might with Meta for structural reasons (rather than “oh but we’re different” reasons).

The main difference I see with Snikket vs Google Talk is that Snikket is not only libre client software, but libre server software as well. The point of Snikket is that individual people host it themselves, not that the Snikket devs run a bunch of Snikket servers which require their Snikket client for connection and just so happen to use xmpp to power it. Really all Snikket is (right now) is a prosody server with some pre-configurations and easy install, as well as an android/ios app which are general xmpp clients that are designed to work well when connected with Snikket servers.

Now it could still go south in a similar way to Google Talk, in that maybe a bunch of people start running Snikket servers and using Snikket clients, and then the Snikket devs start wall gardening the implementation. That would be bad, but the users (both server runners and client users) would be in a much stronger position to pivot away from those decisions.

I think it’s at least an interesting idea (hence why I posted it) for the reasons the author mentions: striking a balance between trustless freedom and interface stability/agility.

That sounds roughly correct, though I don’t see the connection with the article? Unless you’re saying that “products” (like Signal) will always exist, which is probably true but is orthogonal to whether or not other models will succeed.

As for email, I think posteo does a pretty good job, but you’re right options are few and far between. But self hosting email is just as viable as ever? Perhaps less so since e.g. gmail will instantly flag your incoming mail as spam if you’re sending it from randomsite.tld, but honestly that issue hasn’t gotten that bad (yet). Yes, whenever there’s a protocol like email or xmpp, companies will create gmails and signals and turn them into walled gardens, but that doesn’t spoil the protocol for everyone else. It just causes frustration that companies build closed products on top of open technologies, but not much to be done about that.

edit: I do feel norawibb’s point, the slippery mutability of Void is something I am a lot less comfortable with than I used to be. Apparently Guix has spoiled me.

nice

Nice to see a measured (though somewhat pro go) article about a big language’s strengths and weaknesses from someone whose been real world using it for long enough to experience the evolution of the language.

I’ve always liked go, and also think it made fundamentally good decisions and has evolved in a way that respects the original philosophy (e.g. adding generics, but only after massive consideration).

Reddit had an enormous hate totem for go, more than virtually any other language imo, and I always thought that was strange. Curious what people here think.

Obsidian is not free software?! How could anybody even browsing this community consider obsidian?

GNU Guix

what would you be stealing?

Damn IVPN has always been a solid provider. No public missteps and supported XMR earlier than all (reputable) others including mullvad.

Time to switch to i2p and usenet at least until the next p2p protocol comes about.

While there’s a grain of truth in this, I don’t think anybody should be pushing for some standard to be “the” standard which eclipses all others now and forever. People, given sufficient freedom and knowledge, will gravitate towards what works best, be it old or new. Nostr is simply the protocol I prefer. I think it’s better. Why pretend otherwise just becoause activitypub happened to come first and thus is currently more popular?

Nostr is a protocol like activitypub. There are many pieces of software built on top of nostr, just like lemmy and mastodon are both built on activitypub and can interact.

So yes.

Lemmy has certainly already won me over reddit. Going back to centralized social media is something I will actively avoid if at all possible.

However I believe nostr is a theoretically better protocol than activitypub. Having your account/identity tied so strongly to a particular instance is undesirable. As soon as there is a reddit-like (or even forum-like) client for nostr which is relatively active/polished, I will switch. Nip 172 can’t come soon enough.

In addition to being less popular / newer than activitypub, nostr is also full of bitcoin^[1] bros and twitter refugees (not my crowd). But frankly I think complaints about that are like the complaints that lemmy is a place for tankies a couple years ago when people’s only exposure was to a (much smaller than today) lemmy.ml.