James_K

The idea of printing out one of those documents does not conflict with this.

I think the limit of this would be creating your own allocator that works with the stacks, but you could probably stop short of that in most cases.

It's not entirely mad to do it this way, and I can see some benefits. For one, you might have multiple of these pools across the program for different data-types, which would make allocating to any one of them a cheaper operation. It is much more reference safe since you are only ever freeing stuff in a certain context and you can still never have dangling pointers. When you look at memory safe languages, they all default to this eventually. Like Rust in the advanced case will have you implementing your own allocator, lot's of games use this thing called ECS which is essentially a kind of allocator. Goose would just have it be more common.

This is disastrous. The president may need to take emergency measures to suspend the convertibility of the dollar into gold.

Then they can pay the higher rate for energy during the day, and if enough people want this it will be practical to build infrastructure to support them. This issue is they want it and they don't want to pay for it.

So why are insults permitted against other professions?

Their primary goal was creating a Twitter clone, ActivityPub can do that. The federation stuff is really just a toy part of it, as you can tell from the fact that PLC DIDs are still issued from a central authority. Or they could have done it the way I suggested, with indexes of HTML pages. Both would be preferable.

Something based on ActivityPub would be much more reasonable. I would not have nearly the same objections if it integrated with an existing ecosystem rather than carving up the already limited pool of people interested in the open web and locking a bunch of them into a different silo to the rest of us for essentially no technical advantage.

The difference is one uses W3C recommended web interfaces and the other does not. I make blog posts to my website using HTML, anyone can open them using a web browser. I can host those pages one of many static hosting services with no need for a special protocol or anything like that. AT on the other hand reïnvents this entire thing. Can you type the AT URI of a resource into the browser and have it open? I do not believe you can. So if I want to publish HTML content I now need both my regular web server and an AT PDS running on my server. There exists, as far as I'm aware, no application that can view HTML hosted on the AT network so I have to produce all of my blog posts in an agnostic format or publish them to no one, or I can use one of the services that automatically posts a link to that HTML as a BSky post. So you have all of that architecture and what it accomplishes is posting a link to content hosted elsewhere.

Why, instead of creating an indexer that works with existing formats, did they choose to create one intentionally incompatible with 99.999% of web content? Because in practice it's not a web protocol, it's not a serious thing. It's just a whole bunch of bullshit for nerds to make blog posts about that serves as the back end of a Twitter clone. It is standards proliferation. It adds nothing and fragments existing efforts. Instead of contributing to the web ecosystem, it subtracts from it. It breaks the important rules of software development, to do one thing and do it well, to use existing solutions. Everything it does is duplicated, there's a new way to sign documents, a new way to host content, a new data format, a new exchange protocol, a new way to serve documents, a new way to send notifications, etc. It's not a tenable way of doing things. If every person looking to make a web indexer created an entire separate web ecosystem, that would not be sustainable. They're clearly not intending to replace the Web, so what are they doing? It's just a complicated way to store tweets.

And the silliest part is that, if I recall correctly, they don't even have decentralised network yet since only they can issue PLC DIDs.

You would repost a page by linking to it from your own. As for uploading content, that is outside of the scope of an indexer. The user hosts their data with some hosting service, or independently. I believe signatures are already handled by XHTML which allows you to add XML signatures to documents, but regular HTML is sadly lacking here thought it would not be too hard to extend (or to just use the XML serialisation of HTML5).

I think it is generally bad to implement new features like this on the part of the indexer. It should just keep track of an existing web of documents rather than creating it's own format and walled garden.

There are invariably 3 solutions to all “federated” web problems:

- Email

- Semantic HTML

- Web indexing services

In this case, it's mostly indexing and a little of the other two if you want to add social features. I despite ATProto with all my soul for taking a problem with such a simple and standard solution and totally obscuring it behind hundreds of layers of JSON, faux federated services, and technical jargon, all in service of creating an inferior version of Twitter. I guess it wouldn't be as sexy to offer a web indexing service instead.

Ironic that people without imagination write a page using AI.

Email.

I dislike when people use the term “power” to describe making code slightly shorter to type. Operator overloading is not in any meaningful sense more powerful than a language which lacks it.