Sometimes I dream that I could someday launch a zeppelin with pirate NMT and AMPS base stations to put all those ancient phones to work again (I hope you don't consider any GSM phone ancient, even Ericsson GH172 Hotline, which I have two of them... but no, I'm not that old, I got my first own GSM phone in 2005, and it was Nokia 3100 from 2003), and "Pirate Zeppelin" actually is my poet alias.
I'm just saying, there should be some ways to transform this market. Even if it requires a major shakeup for people to wake up.
Share an example of your config, please.
Perhaps I also didn't make myself clear enough about one more aspect.
Even with store-bought Speccies, people could repair them themselves. Maybe replace a chip or a capacitor or a resistor or a transistor. It was as opensource as it could get. x86 came with modularity, but the overall architecture already was much more complex _and_ individual components could not be just repaired at home anymore. Corporations took the monopoly over these things. They told people didn't need it. And now, people are being fed with monolith touchscreen bricks with zero repairability (+ all-on spyware) and they don't ask any questions why.
The software side of things is even worse, but remember it started when IBM+M$ mafia took over.
Consumerism is an ideology built on top of consumption and to drive more of it.
Consumption and consumerism are different things.
Making no purchase is always justified as opposed to making any purchase you don't really need.
It's sad to see that most of the technology is driven by consumerism, not science.
The fact that something is available doesn't necessarily mean we should buy it ASAP.
When and why did we start *needing* more RAM, more CPU speed, more disk space? Who pushed this on us?
Why? Whatever happened to Spectrums, Amstrads, Commodores, incl. C64 and Amigas? Where I live, people *soldered* Spectrum clones themselves as soon as they got access to the necessary chips and other stuff. And booted them off cassette recorders. And did all sorts of shit on that bootleg hardware. Because it's not as complex at its core.
I'm not a programmer now (was until 2016) and I didn't have any Spectrum clone, but I first started learning programming on MK-52, a soviet programmable calculator. Still have it here in a pretty much working state (but MK-61 is more practical if running on batteries). So, do you know how many program RAM it has? 105 bytes (yes, bytes) and 15 direct registers and 4 stack registers, and that's it. It also had 512-byte EPROM, but it went dead about 10 years ago.
My call is to treat every system like embedded and optimize every byte accordingly. Those who disagree should be sentenced to 2 years of MK-52-only coding like myself in the childhood.
I firmly believe that there will be no real breakthrough until we invent (or accept) something to abolish complexity instead of hiding it under multiple abstraction layers so that we could more of it unnoticed.
Here's an example. Although I'm not a guru in Lisp and certainly not in Forth, I like early Forth and even earlier Lisp systems for being self-sufficient. Because your early Lisp/Forth IDE doesn't run on top of an operating system, it *is* an operating system. You have less layers and tighter integration, less space to plant bugs or backdoors.
Here's what I'm talking about: https://www.exemark.com/FORTH/eForthOverviewv5.pdf
They described an implementation on top of an early DOS, but the same could easily have been done over bare metal.
* we could add
I firmly believe that there will be no real breakthrough until we invent (or accept) something to abolish complexity instead of hiding it under multiple abstraction layers so that we could more of it unnoticed.
Here's an example. Although I'm not a guru in Lisp and certainly not in Forth, I like early Forth and even earlier Lisp systems for being self-sufficient. Because your early Lisp/Forth IDE doesn't run on top of an operating system, it *is* an operating system. You have less layers and tighter integration, less space to plant bugs or backdoors.
Here's what I'm talking about: https://www.exemark.com/FORTH/eForthOverviewv5.pdf
They described an implementation on top of an early DOS, but the same could easily have been done over bare metal.
When (not if) this place goes south, just remember it has been run by people preferring Bitcoin to Monero and Signal to Tox.
Exactly. App is simply short for "application". And this concept exists for protocols too.
Nostr itself is an application for JSON, TLS and WebSocket protocols. TLS and WebSocket protocols are applications for TCP. TCP is an application for IP.
See what I'm getting to? Too many nested applications, don't you think?
I really wish someone combined recursive zk-SNARKs of Mina with untraceability of Monero. Probably the easiest way will be if zCash upgrades their blockchain, but it might never happen.
Wait, what? https://api.coincap.io/v2/assets/mina
Just look at this today and tomorrow.
The first and very incomplete version of useful CLI services list compiled by myself is available on my Gopherhole and mirrored here: https://hoi.st/docs/own/cli-services.txt
We want to make our lightning wallet THE BIGGEST launch of the year on Product Hunt.
And with your help, we can for the first time make a #Bitcoin product the product of the day, week, month and year on PH.
More information soon. Real soon.
nostr:npub1mu7nv2jkaq4xausnn098xc8tp3gzgf2w5r2cj68x8dnns0rktmysnsj5cl 🤝⚡
Either opensource, or useless.
Depends on your definition of "app".
No, they do own it. I mean, not the system itself but a large share. I think it's long past the notorious 51% already.
It's becoming just another form of control, and those "useful idiots" who shill it here as opposed to moving to untraceable and/or quantum-resistant cryptocurrencies may well be govt-paid salesmen.