Conversation

Notices

1. 寮 (ryo@social.076.moe)'s status on Thursday, 05-Jan-2023 21:45:49 JST 寮
   Cancellog: Void Linux (IRC)
   I2P: http://ryocafe.i2p/cancellog/voidlinux/
   Tor: http://asc7ewkcvat2wsoi5yuwkej5ukyrqqnpnzpj4u34r2jxnoxhnbx6yqad.onion/cancellog/voidlinux/
   • 新明揺聖 likes this.
   • 寮 (ryo@social.076.moe)'s status on Thursday, 05-Jan-2023 23:42:39 JST 寮

     • 新明揺聖
     AlpineかSlackwareだけ残ったねｗ
     BSDの場合はOpenBSDだけかも
     たかし likes this.
   • 寮 (ryo@social.076.moe)'s status on Friday, 06-Jan-2023 01:03:34 JST 寮

     • 新明揺聖
     FreeBSDはちょっと重いかも
   • Terminal Autism (terminalautism@social.076.moe)'s status on Friday, 06-Jan-2023 11:27:26 JST Terminal Autism

     in reply to
     People involved in software projects are such faggots... is my natural reaction, but at this point I'm not even sure that they are actually worse than the average. Like, you can't have a group of people of any significant size and not have it be like that or worse, at this point.
   • Terminal Autism (terminalautism@social.076.moe)'s status on Friday, 06-Jan-2023 11:30:55 JST Terminal Autism

     in reply to
     Oh, nice GIFs, by the way. Appreciated.
     寮 likes this.
   • 寮 (ryo@social.076.moe)'s status on Friday, 06-Jan-2023 11:43:27 JST 寮

     in reply to

     • Terminal Autism
     Juan RP apparently started Void Linux as a single person project, and at one point he decided to allow the trojan horse in.
     This is what makes me appreciate OpenBSD and Slackware a lot more actually.
     Slackware is maintained by a single person since 1992, nobody else can contribute to the code, nobody else has any say in the direction of the project, and it's doing fine.
     OpenBSD does have people contributing and it's made by a dedicated team, but Theo de Raadt is the one who is having the last word on everything, and this project too is doing fine.
     Both projects run by DICKtators for life, and no drama to be found.
     
     Meanwhile, those projects who introduced "MUH DEMOKRASHI!!" are the ones who get filled with drama and shenanigans like this.
   • Terminal Autism (terminalautism@social.076.moe)'s status on Friday, 06-Jan-2023 12:08:50 JST Terminal Autism

     in reply to
     The only problem will be when those guys inevitably bite the big bazooka, kick the bucket, whatever amusing euphemism for dying you prefer. Or when they themselves go in a bad direction. Like, imagine if Theo becomes a tranny and goes completely insane. Pretty sure I joked about that somewhere before.
     
     Then you have the entire project run 100% by someone that you dislike, instead of arguably just a loud minority plus people that just don't want drama and don't want to get involved with other people, and a bunch of soyboys that are just afraid of saying anything.
     
     At this point, I have accepted that I just generally don't like tech people (which shouldn't be surprising, I don't like most people, and all tech people are people). Almost all of them are wimpy conformists that don't know anything other than a very specific skill, and they think that being able to do that one thing makes them smart when it really does not.
     
     There are few people that I know a significant amount about and that I still respect. It's a small group. One is definitely Terry Davis, he deserves all of it and was the hero that humanity needed but didn't deserve, and another example of someone of a prophet or wise man archetype, that was killed by his own civilization, that then collapsed shortly afterwards. Other than him, maybe people that designed old systems and languages, but I don't actually know much about them.
     
     Chuck Moore also comes to mind, the creator of Forth. I read some of his writings and watched some interviews and I like him too. Really, he took simplicity in computing to an extreme that I don't think anyone else ever did, and I heard tales (from things written by old people) of how absurdly skilled he was, how he would take other people's programs and make them massively smaller and simpler in a very small amount of time.
     
     Also Gary Kildall is another likely candidate, if the accounts of what he was like are correct. Some other designers as well, I'm sure, but once something is done by a team, you really don't know who did what. Generally one guy takes credit for managing the project, but it wasn't something that a single person could ever take credit for, it was a combination of ideas from different people.
     
     Of course, this is now impossible, because every system has to be connected to enormous, endless layers of complexity. It's very unfortunate, I would like to live in a world where everything is simple and it's normal for people to make their own OSs, but we're about as far from that as we could possibly be.
   • 寮 (ryo@social.076.moe)'s status on Friday, 06-Jan-2023 12:53:16 JST 寮

     in reply to

     • Terminal Autism
     Yes, it's true.
     While the advantage of a single DICKtator is that it's next to impossible to subvert him/her, but if he/she gets subverted, it's over.
     
     As for people making their own OSs, I guess that will become possible only after RISC-V becomes common use.
     Back in the 90s it was still possible, which is why so many different OS's existed back then.
     But then IntHell and AMD on the CPU front and IntHell, ATI (now AMD), and Nvidia on the GPU front NDA'd the crap out of their architecture, and the only survivers were Windblows, macOS, Linux, and BSD, because making your own OS was simply made impossible (perhaps except for things like TempleOS, React, Haiku, and MikeOS, but those who made it are/were VERY dedicated).
   • Trolerus Cognitus (troler@social.076.moe)'s status on Friday, 06-Jan-2023 16:53:28 JST Trolerus Cognitus

     in reply to
     You forgot to mention OS/2.
     
     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ArcaOS
     
     ArcaOS is not a pure OS/2, because it has Linux software mixed into it. Making it a hybrid OS.
   • 寮 (ryo@social.076.moe)'s status on Friday, 06-Jan-2023 17:37:30 JST 寮

     in reply to

     • Trolerus Cognitus
     And I will probably forget a whole lots of others, like FreeDOS and its forks for example.
     But I didn't write about the fact that CPU's and GPU's are so fucking proprietary just to make a massive list of operating systems, which is what "except for things like" already covers.
     Trolerus Cognitus likes this.
   • Terminal Autism (terminalautism@social.076.moe)'s status on Saturday, 07-Jan-2023 10:05:29 JST Terminal Autism

     in reply to
     Yeah, hardware massively complicates this. Though ARM is no better, because ARM computers are special snowflakes and are completely closed, and you pretty much get what you get and can't expand it at all, it's worse than x86. I hope RISC-V catches on and does better. Hell, I hope GNU makes the Hurd kernel work at least on it, if nothing else, because as soon as free hardware becomes available, there will be no reason for them to focus on anything else.
     
     But it's a real shame that things ended up like this. It's another example of how everything in computing tends to go in the worst possible direction. Everything that becomes standard is almost inevitably the worst shit that happens to be available. We could have PowerPC desktops now, but nope, it lost to the x86 and got wiped out. Maybe we could have SPARC, but it was never used outside of servers and workstations.
     
     By the way, both OpenSPARC and OpenPOWER have OpenFirmware (Check it out, it's very cool: https://yewtu.be/watch?v=KvxxAeuhPp0 ), which is built into an implementation of Forth. You can run programs directly on the firmware, no other additional OS required. Why don't we have that? Hell, why aren't OSs just built on top of powerful languages like that in the first place, why all these layers of complexity? From what I have heard, a window manager has been written for it, and even a Forth-based Emacs clone and some games. It's just ridiculous that this is not possible on every single computer. To me it seems like the things that are allowed to become popular on the consumer market are deliberately picked specifically to restrict the user, and to prevent individuals from being able to do too much themselves.
     
     You can also see the amazing things that were done with MIPS CPUs in 90s and early 2000s consoles. But nope, x86. And the only alternatives are shitty locked-down ARM single-board computers that can't be expanded and that run like, two OSs, if you're lucky. And with no standardization, so each OS has to support each device individually, on top of the OSs themselves being clunky and barely even designed.
     
     Also, don't forget Mezzano ( https://github.com/froggey/Mezzano https://yewtu.be/watch?v=Wd_-h5kRQLo ). It's an OS written entirely in Common Lisp. Still only runs on VMs as far as I know, but it's very impressive that it exists in this environment of very complicated computers and also nothing but Unix clones everywhere, and also an architecture that wasn't exactly built for that type of language (probably quite the opposite). I assume not made by many people either, and if that's the case, they must be insanely productive. https://social.076.moe/url/50258
   • 寮 (ryo@social.076.moe)'s status on Saturday, 07-Jan-2023 10:21:59 JST 寮

     in reply to

     • Terminal Autism
     Technically, ARM is a RISC clone (not the other way around), but locked down and loysensed out to whoever pays them to use it.
     It's just that RISC started gaining traction just recently.
     Though not sure if I'd really support GNU in finishing Hurd after them having stalled it 31 years ago in favor for the Linux kernel, because even though Stallman is seemingly more tech freedom aware than Torvalds is, every single GNU tool is bloat, so I'd expect Hurd to be bloat as well when that gets developed again.
     
     But I can sympethise with the Linux kernel being so bloated in a way, because there's so much more hardware today than there were a decade ago, they all require a separate driver which are all probably very bloated too, and on top of that most of them are proprietary blobs or poor attempts on rewriting the driver too.
     But I could be wrong on that, because I need a proper comparison between Linux and Linux-libre in order to actually be sure.
   • Terminal Autism (terminalautism@social.076.moe)'s status on Saturday, 07-Jan-2023 12:21:07 JST Terminal Autism

     in reply to
     I don't know, I think it's pretty neat ( https://yewtu.be/watch?v=w3NfOeecMkI ), and I could use it over Linux. And it's like, version 0.999999, so it can't be that difficult to get it to work on a single piece of hardware... right? And Stallman is basically irrelevant. He doesn't really do anything other than writing retarded things.
     
     Also, I wouldn't say that everything GNU in general is all that bloated, not compared to pretty much everything else, other than even more niche systems. They would never make a Firefox/Chrome-tier abomination themselves, that's for sure. Though they do like their features, I guess (and I do as well, I'm the "maximum amount of features for the smallest possible cost" type, not a mememalist).
     
     I think the biggest negatives would be their core utils, I guess, because anything used in scripts may be run a trillion times in a loop, and you really want maximum performance there, but also, shell sucks, so whatever. Also, bash is slow, but you can just use another shell for scripting.
     
     Lost the rest of this comment because it failed to be sent and I only noticed when it was too late, and fcitx can't save long comments. Anyway, glibc is probably the worst consequence of not maximizing simplicity, because it all the security issues that some people say it causes, and because many programs depend on it and can't be built with musl, I hear.
     
     In some cases, accusations of bloat confuse me. People accuse Screen of being bloated compared to tmux. The binary is half of the size of tmux, though, at least on my system. And it does things that tmux doesn't, like displaying sixel images in a compatible terminal with img2sixel -P. Also, selecting text without a bunch of white space, so that its copy mode can actually be useful.
     
     People also accuse Emacs of that, compared to Vim, but the Emacs binary is 6.3 MB and Vim is 4.9 MB (both with GUI support, to be more fair). Not a huge difference (though there are .el files as well, that are now compiled, and maybe some Vimscript stuff, that will never be compiled ever), and Emacs is a lot more than just an editor, it's a whole programming environment and programming language, with a daemon, terminal emulator, file manager, web browser, ridiculously powerful markup language, shell, IRC client, package manager and much much much more, and all of those have image support, and it can also run as a daemon. All of that involves either interacting with or editing text in some way or another. Not to speak of everything it can do with additional packages. 1.4 MB more and it can do a lot more than Vim does or even could do, because it's not really even a sane comparison, they are just too different.
     
     But yeah, it's all a value judgement. You want programs to run smoothly, but other than that, it's all about what features you want or don't want, and also how the program will be used (again, something that will run repeatedly in a loop is different from an interactive program). That's why I'm not into the mememalism thing. I want as many available features as possible for the smallest possible cost.
     
     This can be achieved through brilliant designs that are simple, but that get a lot of flexibility out of that simplicity, so it can be extended much more easily and to a much greater extent than overcomplicated corporate bloatware, so that a lot can be built on top of it and people can use it as a foundation to built their own environment on. Some people, though, if they went just a bit further on the mememalism, would be saying "Unix shells are bloat and do too many things, just use Windows' cmd.exe instead".
     
     Don't know what my point was, I write too much. And I haven't been sleeping enough so my head almost hurts. I am currently nerfed and cannot use my full power. https://social.076.moe/url/50551
   • 寮 (ryo@social.076.moe)'s status on Saturday, 07-Jan-2023 12:48:28 JST 寮

     in reply to

     • Terminal Autism
     > They would never make a Firefox/Chrome-tier abomination themselves
     
     *coughicecatcough*
     
     > I think the biggest negatives would be their core utils, I guess
     
     And gcc, though I don't really have much against gcc, it's doing its job, just compilation takes unnecessarily long and binaries it spits out are unnecessarily large compared to say tcc for example.
     
     > because many programs depend on it and can't be built with musl, I hear
     
     It can't be used with SoystemD, which is really the big reason why Juan RP decided to not use it for Void Linux.
     
     Though I would rather classify Emacs as an operating system within an operating system rather than a development environment, because it can do so many more things that has nothing to do with development, some of which you listed already.
   • Trolerus Cognitus (troler@social.076.moe)'s status on Saturday, 07-Jan-2023 18:05:30 JST Trolerus Cognitus

     in reply to

     • Terminal Autism
     You forgot to mention, that Emacs has EVIL-mode.
   • Terminal Autism (terminalautism@social.076.moe)'s status on Sunday, 08-Jan-2023 02:17:07 JST Terminal Autism

     in reply to
     Yes, I thought about Icecat, but it's not really all that fair to blame that on them, it's still just Firefox. They just forked it and made it meet the FSF's standards, so none of the bloat comes from them.
     
     The GCC vs tcc thing is because tcc is made to be as simple as it can be, while GCC is made to be an highly optimizing compiler. The more you optimize, the slower it is to compile, by necessity. Of course, there is a balance there, and optimizations are less necessary the less bloated the software is. I think Terry's approach for HolyC was actually more in line with tcc's, and look at his OS. It boots in an instant even though it compiles like, half of it, right as it boots, and it doesn't need all of GCC's optimizations because the software is simple, so in a compiled language, it will be fast pretty much no matter what.
     
     Also, if I called Emacs a development environment, it was a mistake, I meant to say computing environment. Anyway, Emacs is really in just the right position to make you ask "what even is an operating system anyway?", just like Lisp in general does, and also Forth. Languages like that are so powerful, and you can run them on bare metal, and if you do... are they an operating system now? PilOS ( https://picolisp.com/wiki/?PilOS ) is basically just PicoLisp running on bare metal, and it has OS in the name. What if you put that in a ROM chip, would it still be an OS? If a computer has a BASIC ROM chip, and BASIC is the interface between you and the hardware, is that an OS?
   • Terminal Autism (terminalautism@social.076.moe)'s status on Sunday, 08-Jan-2023 07:15:52 JST Terminal Autism

     in reply to

     • Trolerus Cognitus
     That's not built-in functionality, though, it's a package. That was just stuff that Emacs comes with by default, within that little difference in size between the binaries. But yeah, if you install evil-mode, then you also have Vim inside of Emacs. Meanwhile, having Emacs inside of Vim would be practically impossible, because you would have to rewrite Vim, and then it wouldn't be Vim anymore, it would just be Vimacs Lisp with an editor built on top of it.
     
     Point is, they are really different things. Saying that Emacs is bloated because it does too many things is like saying that Unix is bloated because it does too many things and therefore doesn't follow the Unix philosophy. Or that C doesn't follow it because you can write programs that do different things in it.
     
     Silly argument that nobody would ever make in those cases, because there is nothing wrong with a general-use programming language, and there is nothing wrong with a general-use environment to run programs in. But people do it to Emacs, because they see it as a text editor, in part because of silly comparisons between things that are not really all that comparable, and the idea that having features is somehow inherently a bad thing. And that last part goes back to GNU, because people criticize GNU programs for being bloated... but are they? Not if those features are useful to you, especially if the performance is still fine, and there are no other negatives. Sometimes they are bloated, but I wouldn't say that in general.
     
     Wow! There was a point to all this! It eventually went full circle back to the original topic! It may even look like I planned it even though I didn't!
     Trolerus Cognitus likes this.