/tech/ - Technology★

- Abandon Loonix/iOS/OSX/Windows/BSD/Android.

- Popularize Smalltalk, Oberon, Lisp machines, and Plan 9.

- Extirpate the Web, keep Gopher.

- Stop DRM and the IOTS.

- Destroy the x86/ARM architectures, let POWER/PPC/MIPS/(RISC in general) survive.

- Have a firing squad for executing programmers who use shitty kiddie languages.

- Jail the pajeets that want to make "MMO apps using blockchain technology" (sic).

That would just be the start.

Change social relations to the means of production.

Windows/mac can't be installed if we own all the factories instead of the oems that install Windows.

>how can we actually make things better?

Deleting this board would be a good start

>>917552

You mean (((Bryan Lunduke)))

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAMkz3dWUjA

- Have kids

- Raise them to be Hitler

- Cross your fingers

>but the (((courtesy letter))) and their subsequent removal of their FSP repo and pointing instead to Intel's

nuking isreal would be a great start to solving this problem

>>917566

Why do you want to beat your kids anon?

>>917549

>- Abandon Loonix/iOS/OSX/Windows/BSD/Android.

If you really want to make things better, abandon everything written in C, which includes all of those.

>- Popularize Smalltalk, Oberon, Lisp machines,

These should be popularized, and so should Multics, VMS, and all the other OSes that have solved problems the shills don't want you to think are problems.

>and Plan 9.

Plan 9 sucks even more than 1991 UNIX. 1990s UNIX-Haters rants that people here thought were made up are still valid in Plan 9 in 2018. If you want something resembling UNIX if it was redone 50 years later by more intelligent people, take a look at Multics.

>let POWER/PPC/MIPS/(RISC in general) survive.

RISC sucks because it's made specifically for C and UNIX. x86 is a badly designed CISC that's full of obsolete bullshit, but it still has advantages over RISC.

   Date: Tue, 19 Nov 91 08:27:49 EST
   From: DH

   Yesterday Rob Pike from Bell Labs gave a talk on the
   latest and greatest successor to unix, called Plan 9.
   Basically he described ITS's mechanism for using file
   channels to control resources as if it were the greatest
   new idea since the wheel.

Amazing, wasn't it?  They've even reinvented the JOB device.
In another couple of years I expect they will discover the
need for PCLSRing (there were already hints of this in his
talk yesterday).

I suppose we could try explaining this to them now, but
they'll only look at us cross-eyed and sputter something
about how complex and inelegant that would be.  And then
we'd really lose it when they come back and tell us how they
invented this really simple and elegant new thing...

Multics was written in a high-level language first.  ITS ran
on the PDP-6 and PDP-10.

Sure they came up with an implementation.  You just make a
machine that looks just like a PDP-11 and you can port unix
to it.  No problem!

The latest idea is to build machines (RISC machines with
register windows) which are designed specifically for C
programs and unix (just check out the original Berkeley RISC
papers if you don't believe me: it was a specific design
goal).  Now, people tell me that the advantage of a Sun over
a Lisp machine is that it's a general-purpose machine ("Of
course it's general purpose." they say.  "Why it even runs
unix.").

Hmm, well this example shows that at least the weenix unies
know how to USE recursion!

    I'm just getting around to responding to this, with an
    historical note which I cannot resist.  Paul's paper is
    a good, thorough, and competently done analysis, but
    the conclusion takes me back about 14 years.  Are we
    always destined to reinvent the same stuff every N
    years?

There is a well known effect in the computer architecture
community, which in summary states that all major
architectural mistakes must be and have been made at least
three times: once in the design of mainframes, once in the
design of minicomputers, and once in the design of
microcomputers.  Perhaps a similar rule applies to operating
systems.

The same mistakes are made once in mainframe OS's, twice in
microcomputer OS's, and N times in Unix (tm) operating
systems.  What seems surprising and different is that they
don't get fixed in Unix.  Mostly people don't even realize
they ARE mistakes.

>>917580

>>- Abandon Loonix/iOS/OSX/Windows/BSD/Android.

>If you really want to make things better, abandon everything written in C, which includes all of those.

What do you recommend instead?

>like it or not, a modern web standards-compliant browser is kinda essential for basic usability these days.

No. 90% of my internet use is mail, ftp, irc, ssh, torrent, ppp, and gopher. You *really* need to free yourself of the modern commericalized web; I only really use chans with browsers like Lynx/Links/w3m.

>>917602

This is my thinking too. And yet we live in an era where the average man cannot do a thing unless their is an "app for that".

>>917552

Why doesn't Purism just move to AMD? I'm sure AMD chips are easier to fix and have less severe backdoors.

>>917580

kill yourself rustfag

>>917586

You seem to be new. Meet The LISP Machines Fag. He doesn't suggest alternatives., just quotes some old book and literal shitposting.

Everyone that isn't us is a TV-watching robot with no soul. They don't live in the same world as us. They think the TV is real, and act out what they see, irl, to fit in. To sum it up, jewish mind control.

>>917546 (OP)

A suicide is a good start.

>>917663

Stallman is a non practicing jew and constantly tells everyone about how there's no god though.

He might be racially a jew but he's alright. I certainly trust an atheist more than a jew, some can be decent people.

>>917699

>Stallman is a non practicing jew

Its not the religion op was talking about anon.

>>917699

Apart from his last name being German, I have never seen any evidence of him being jewish.

>>917708

>Stallman has said that he is "an atheist of Jewish ancestry"[100] and often wears a button that reads "Impeach God"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman

How about he himself saying so

>>917712

>ancestry

>matters

>>917701

A jew's slimyness is a cultural trait not a racial trait. A non practicing jew can be a decent person.

>>917728

Magically making everything libre will _not_ stop Google/Windows/Apple/Facebook from mistreating their users. Why? They don't care if it exploits them; and if you tell them it does, *you* are the crazy person.

>>917611

The difference between what's in the pictures and what's in your post is tabletop and video games.

If you want to make your own rules up, you can easily do so in tabletop games. Those pictures only apply if the original core community invites the rest of those people to their usual hangout to play with them.

For video games, you're(for the most part) groveling at the feet of businesses in hopes they'll make a product just for you instead of for the cash cows that vastly outnumber you.

In this day and age there are several open source game engines. Instead of being a depressed loser blaming everything on vaginas, millennials, and melanin, why don't you step up and make the product you want to see?

>>917597

>tfw 8chan is a Hello world program.

8chan needs millions of lines of code on top of the OS. UNIX is extreme bloat and waste, but it doesn't do anything to make programming easier because everything in UNIX sucks and has to be worked around anyway. Shills want you to think better OSes would be bigger, but OSes that did more were smaller and faster while also making every single program smaller and faster.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SUNMOS

>SUNMOS was developed as a reaction to the heavy weight version of OSF/1 that ran as a single-system image on the Paragon and consumed 8-12 MB of the 16 MB available on each node, leaving little memory available for the compute applications. In comparison, SUNMOS used 250 KB of memory per node. Additionally, the overhead of OSF/1 limited the network bandwidth to 35 MB/s, while SUNMOS was able to use 170 MB/s of the peak 200 MB/s available.[2]

>do your lisp OSes use the superior microkernel design?

No, they don't have a kernel. The user has complete control over the machine. Lisp machines have a single address space and use tagged memory and bounds checking for protection.

>like it or not, a modern web standards-compliant browser is kinda essential for basic usability these days.

There's nothing stopping you from writing a browser on a Lisp machine, but you're talking about porting a browser instead of writing one because web browsers are extreme bloatware. They would be much simpler and faster on a Lisp machine because GC and a lot of the other functionality is already there.

>umm I think part of why they say that is because lisp machines dont have much software at all, outside of maybe some very obscure cases. So yes Sun unix systems are more general purpose because they can actually have a purpose ok?

Lisp machines had a lot of software when they were being made and Lisp Machine Lisps are more general purpose than C and UNIX, which aren't even good for working with strings and numbers. Most of the additional "system" software wasn't necessary on Lisp machines because the OS worked properly already.

>umm what are mistakes?

C data types are broken. UNIX commands are broken. Nothing works right, but the weenies spend more time trying to confuse you so you can't tell right from wrong than they do fixing the problems.

>using a language that isn't lisp and hurts your feels? uwu

That's fearmongering. You don't have to use Lisp on a Lisp machine and other languages have far more integration and compatibility than non-C languages do on UNIX. Even C and C++ would run on a Lisp machine, but they wouldn't be able to use the same strings, arrays, structures, and classes as Lisp. Everything but C being compatible is better than everything but C being incompatible.

>m-mister lisp meanie? wheres your modern lisp OS? where can I try it?

That's what sucks. Someone posted this link here a while ago, which is a Lisp OS.

https://github.com/froggey/Mezzano

There are many reasons why GNU Emacs is as big as it is
while its original ITS counterpart was much smaller:

- C is a horrible language in which to implement such things
as a Lisp interpreter and an interactive program.  In
particular any program that wants to be careful not to crash
(and dump core) in the presence of errors has to become
bloated because it has to check everywhere.  A reasonable
condition system would reduce the size of the code.

- Unix is a horrible operating system for which to write an
Emacs-like editor because it does not provide adequate
support for anything except trivial "Hello world" programs.
In particular, there is no standard good way (or even any in
many variants) to control your virtual memory sharing
properties.

- Unix presents such a poor interaction environment to users
(the various shells are pitiful) that GNU Emacs has had to
import a lot of the functionality that a minimally adequate
"shell" would provide.  Many programmers at TLA never
directly interact with the shell, GNU Emacs IS their shell,
because it is the only adequate choice, and isolates them
from the various Unix (and even OS) variants.

Don't complain about TLA programs vs. Unix.  The typical
workstation Unix requires 3 - 6 Mb just for the kernel, and
provides less functionality (at the OS level) than the OSs
of yesteryear.  It is not surprising that programs that ran
on adequate amounts of memory under those OSs have to
reimplement some of the functionality that Unix has never
provided.

>>917747

If only lisp machines did not suck.

There is no going back now. The _only_ possible way to roll this retardation back is to provide a mathematical crack to all popular cryptography. That breaks internet shopping and banking, which effectively kicks normies off the internet. Also all DRM and the jew-globalist lopsided globalist-supply/localized-buyer pricing buttfuckery.

>>917747

>but OSes that did more were smaller and faster while also making every single program smaller and faster.

>The typical workstation Unix requires 3 - 6 Mb just for the kernel, and provides less functionality (at the OS level) than the OSs of yesteryear.

umm.. I disagree. I mean lets take a look at what you're doing here. You're comparing an OS made in the 70s or thereabouts to an OS made today. The newer one is going to be heavier because theres a lot more going on now. There was less hardware to support back then, there were less features like multiple filesystem options and services like NFS and SFTP and HTTPS and DNS and DHCP and OMG its almost like u can't compare old OSes to new ones. Guess what, mister lisp meanie? PDP-11 AT&T UNIX uses less RAM and storage space than GNU/Linux or Free/Open/NetBSD. Do u know why we don't use that OS anymore or compare modern unix to it (generally)? because it can't actually run the stuff we use, and lacks features.

>C and UNIX, which aren't even good for working with strings and numbers.

*giggles*

>No, they don't have a kernel

wow! ok that's interesting.

>The user has complete control over the machine.

what does that mean, mister? Are there no privileged/unprivileged users, access controls, etc? Is everybody root? Im just saying, sometimes theres cases where u don't want a user to have complete control.

>UNIX commands are broken.

how? they seem to be working perfectly fine for me.

>>using a language that isn't lisp and hurts your feels? uwu

>That's fearmongering.

I dont think u know what that word means. Unless u are scared of non-lisp languages hurting your feels ^_^

>You don't have to use Lisp on a Lisp machine and other languages have far more integration and compatibility than non-C languages do on UNIX.

Really? How can u say that when most languages we use today were made post-C and were never used on lisp machines? This sounds like a hypothesis u just came up with to make your stuff sound better.

btw do u like boys, mister lisp meanie? OwO

>>917580

>RISC sucks because it's made specifically for C and UNIX

Not true.

>x86 is a badly designed CISC that's full of obsolete bullshit, but it still has advantages over RISC.

x86 is garbage but saying it has it's advantages over any recent RISC ISA is just moronic.

>Plan 9 sucks even more than 1991 UNIX

This needs to be backed up with supporting evidence and I suspect you have none(those retarded, non-cited quotes don't count as they themselves don't provide any supporting evidence but just rhetoric).

>>917747

>use tagged memory and bounds checking for protection.

Keep in mind that if you run another language like C programs aren't given the same protection and get read and write where they aren't supposed to. This isn't a problem since it's a single user workstation.

>>917747

get a load of this timeshare

>>917772

>has it's advantages over any recent RISC ISA is just moronic.

It can get more done per instruction per clock cycle. Unless those RISC CPUs are 10 ghz they are gonna be slow AF.

>>917779

The funny thing with RISC is that it's just an arbitrary reduction. Why not reduce it to just a single instruction like subleq. IBM's System 360 model 25 had only 1 instruction.

>>917784

The one instruction set meme gets real bad real fast. Trying to do anything real needs a ton of extra registers and many more instructions. The reduction in number of registers needed to do shit with more instructions well offsets the more complicated FSM in the control unit. Also, single instruction uses all of the datapaths per operation, which will have a higher power consumption.

But yes, the number of instructions for RISC is pretty arbitrary. Well made ISAs have good reasons for choosing the instruction bit width they go for.

>>917784

>RISC is that it's just an arbitrary reduction

RISC does not mean reduced number of instructions. It means instructions that only do one type of thing. In CISC it is very common to fetch 2 values from different places and add them together depositing them in a different memory location all in one instruction. RISC does not do this. With RISC you issue 2 load instructions, an add, then a store instruction.

>>917779

Modern x86_64 converts the CISC into RISC and then executes the RISC. "Get more done per clock cycle" is a poorly informed meme. A true CISC would have much slower clock speeds than RISC for a few reasons. The datapath is longer which leads to more propagation delays. Also, the increased complexity makes pipelining harder which again reduces clock speed. Also, some CISC instructions take more than one clock cycle. Load/store architectures get one instruction per cycle, but many CISC aren't load/store.

>>917786

You're confusing load/store architecture with RISC vs. CISC. R means Reduced. It just so happens that you gain more modularity using load/store, which is beneficial for having fewer instructions.

>>917788

>Modern x86_64 converts the CISC into RISC and then executes the RISC

This is very misleading. Not accurate at all. Its a meme idiots say. It decodes an instruction and then dispatches the execution for it. It does not run an add at (assuming 2ghz cpu) 8 ghz on some internal RISC cpu.

> A true CISC would have much slower clock speeds than RISC for a few reasons

Where are the 8ghz RISC CPUs? I see plenty of 4GHZ CISC ones.

>"Get more done per clock cycle" is a poorly informed meme.

It literally does.

>You're confusing load/store architecture with RISC vs. CISC

Almost all RISC are load/store.

>R means Reduced

Reduced does not mean reduced number of instructions. Very first line of wikipedia:

>A reduced instruction set computer, or RISC (pronounced 'risk', /ɹɪsk/), is one whose instruction set architecture (ISA) allows it to have fewer cycles per instruction (CPI) than a complex instruction set computer (CISC).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduced_instruction_set_computer

>>917790

RISC cucks BTFO

>>917790

>not accurate at all

the frequency limitation comes from a combination of transistor switch speed, and pipelining. Switch speed is influenced by the kinetics of diffusion of carriers across a PN junction. Pipelining is a design choice, but you can assume that all of your shit is pipelined as fuck these days. Some sources to back up my previous claim:

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/5806589/why-does-intel-hide-internal-risc-core-in-their-processors

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/5806589/why-does-intel-hide-internal-risc-core-in-their-processors

Prof. Terman, who worked with Intel, mentioned a few times that Intel does this when I was taking Computation Structures.

>8ghz RISC CPUs?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPARC

See the 5GHZ SPARC. Again, the limit in clock speed has much more to do with the small scale design choices and propagation delays of each branch of logic, not so much the ISA. Also, x86 does not execute one instruction every clock cycle.

>wikipedia

it goes on to say that the definition is ambiguous, but they're generally characterized by small set of simple and general instructions. And it also supports my claim later down!

>It is also the case that since the Pentium Pro (P6) Intel has been using an internal RISC processor core for its processors

Their architecture has nothing to do with CISC, only their decoder does. Why would Intel be using it if it were inferior? They're only still using x86_64 because that's where the markershare is. This is why Itanium failed, even with the huge backing and deployment.

>>917792

samefag

>>917797

Fuck that was the same link. It was supposed to be

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12353489

>>917797

>See the 5GHZ SPARC

There are plenty of consumer 5GHZ x86

>x86 does not execute one instruction every clock cycle.

Who said it did.

>it goes on to say that the definition is ambiguous

I'm going to take the VERY FIRST LINE, as the primary.

>not so much the ISA

Which is why you want to do more work for each instruction. You have a big decoder managing the ALUs. The path from the decoder to the actually processing units is small even if the decoder takes half the CPU.

>the frequency limitation comes from a combination of transistor switch speed, and pipelining

Then i'm going to stick with CISC if risc wont actually be able to do more.

>>917799

You are a god damn mongoloid who has no ability to synthesize information and has latched onto an opinion which you do not understand. If you are actually willing to learn then I will tell you why you are wrong.

>>917801

>If you are actually willing to learn then I will tell you why you are wrong.

I patiently explained why you are wrong and yet you cant understand it.

>>917699

Kikes do not actually believe in god. They believe that they themselves are god and are masters of this world. The worst kikes in history have all been 'athiests'. Stallman is yet another

>>917802

You're sidestepping the bulk of my argument that has undeniable proof that you are wrong. If CISC is so fucking great then why does Intel since P6 convert the instructions to RISC and execute those?

What then is the difference between sending a CPU CISC if it's just going to convert them to RISC? Before you say code size, keep in mind that CISC instructions tend to be wider and have many more arguments. Also, keep in mind that the main time impact isn't throughput, but latency.

If CISC is super optimized, why can't the optimizations lie in the compiler for a RISC computer? Compilers are easier to optimize for RISC because they are more simple. Additionally, caching means that a CPU is pretty much always busy, instructions out the ass to execute. Your ALUs are not gong to sit idle while the CPU prances around. if it has data, it's going to chomp at it. This is why pipelining and branch prediction lead to massive increases in speed.

>Try distro

>Systemd botnet

>Try Systemd-less distro

>Unironically run by a commie, has section to bait normalfags into putting their real name, address and irl photo in settings, obviously to catalogue bad goyim

>Try another Systemd-less distro

>Unironic Google calendar option in the time settings, comes with Chrome

Holy hell. Are computers just dead at this point?

>>917811

>convert the instructions to RISC and execute those?

Because they emulate old instructions in the context of current instructions. Many of their instructions are also very large that can be expressed in simpler terms. Calling it an internal RISC cpu is incredibly misleading.

>why can't the optimizations lie in the compiler for a RISC computer

Because history has proven its easier to push certain things into the CPU than the compiler.

>Additionally, caching means that a CPU is pretty much always busy, instructions out the ass to execute

You are gonna blow your instruction cache with RISC. Memory limits are much worse for RISC.

>>917824

>Calling it an internal RISC cpu is incredibly misleading.

Then why do people keep doing it? Do you have architecture information sources that you could share that can change my mind, or are you going to keep on with the rhetoric?

>Because history has proven its easier to push certain things into the CPU than the compiler.

Yes. It is faster to implement page switching in hardware, but we do it in software anyway. Reducing complexity where it's hard to debug is always good, helps reduce development time which lets devs spend it on pipelining, branch prediction, caches, etc. which is much more tangible than a decode that could be done in software at compile time.

>You are gonna blow your instruction cache with RISC. Memory limits are much worse for RISC.

Can you back this up with anything other than rhetoric?

>>917823

salix

>>917831

>which is much more tangible than a decode that could be done in software at compile time.

Ah yes you mean so we can blow the instruction cache with trivial instructions. NICE!

>>917586

Imaginary Lisp Machine and imaginary Lisp machine OS with imaginary Lisp software.

>>917597

>>917552

This is very good AI, I have to admit.

>>917864

Also, even Plan 9 fags are dedicated enough to continue developing and using their non-Unix operating system. Fucking Hurd is making more headway than any of the shit the unix haters sperg and his sources bitch about. It's like the unix haters fags all expect someone else to swoop in and magically solve all their problems instead of putting in an ounce of work themselves.

GDPR and ePrivacy is a step in the right direction. we just need more countries and then the US to start taking privacy seriously.

scare normalfags with facts. if there is hope it lies in the proles.

>>918277

>animeposter is retarded

Yeah as in Facebook doesn't use your data for other not so good things :^)

>>917879

Report, filter and do not reply to tripfags.

>>918280

>An idiot that actually has no idea how facebook operates and gets all his news from clickbait

>>917823

>being this butthurt about default DE setup menus

But this is true, they should have never shipped software that promotes non-free services.

>>918285

Anon restricting users freedom is bad.

>>918277

Imagine some major country bans non-free software from using.

Imagine jews and normies kvetching about their freehdums to share info with botnet and run malwares.

It's your own doing. You became lazy and arrogant which became your own undoing.

>>918277

Probably all true and it's good that you are sharing facts to counter paranoia. That doesn't make things much better though:

Fact: Facebook will give away your data to apps/partners who claim to have a decent reason for it (i got approved for those permissions myself back when making an app)

Fact: Facebook will hoard as much data as possible, even that gathered on other websites through trackers, and will never voluntarily let go of it

Fact: Facebook can always be hacked and its data sold to many types of criminals

Fact: Most or all of these same points apply to Google, Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, etc. etc.. Avoiding Facebook is one thing. Then try and avoid reCAPTCHA, people with Google Home, companies that require Windows 10 to be used, and all this other bullshit and that takes an unwarranted toll on a person's quality of life, unless they are remarkably asocial by nature.

>>918301

don't forget.

>Fact: when a radical female jew finally becomes president they will seize facebooks data and use it to identify round up and jail all supposed opposition

>>917747

I like you. Never stop posting.

>>918301

>Facebook will give away your data to apps/partners who claim to have a decent reason for it

Wrong. Facebook will give your permission to 3rd party apps AFTER EXPLICIT CONSENT for that app by the user.

>Facebook can always be hacked and its data sold to many types of criminals

So you don't actually have any complaint against facebook just rando muh hackers

NICE!

>>918296

>Yes goy we have to ban these things to protect you, your too stupid goy.

>>918316

inb4 *you're

>>917552

You mean the guy who just putted all his content behind a paywall and disabled comments on all videos?

To see he's videos you have to pay him publicly and use non free software?

The guy who don't care about free software ?

The guy who uses an hour to say something that could be done in 10 minutes ?

The guy who uses 10 minutes to talk about his sponsors in every video?

Instead of watching that kike watch someone like Luke Smith

And here is a copy of FSP repo

www.mediagoblin.xyz/sj6a.zip

>>917823

>hurr muh systemd

Maybe if you weren't this much of an autist over a fucking piece of free software you would have an easier time. I bet you also think dbus is bad.

>>918320

>You mean the guy who just putted all his content behind a paywall

Anon free software / content does not mean free of charge

>>918324

No but patron requires non free Java script and Bryan openly admits to use non free software and he develops non free software

>>918326

How dare someone contribute to free software and still write other things. If you are not going to dedicate your life to it you should just die.

>>918327

Name one project where he has made a valuable contribution

>>918330

He does shows all the time with tons of different projects. Not all contributions are software anon.

>>918331

Well I'm pretty sure PewDiePie has used OBS on a stream should we all just hail him because of that

>>918333

Yes because using one open source program is the same as interviewing and publicizing different projects and developers every week.

>>918323

dbus is bad too you cock sucking faggot

https://liberapay.com/ exists

It's a patreon clone for freetards, runs without javascript just fine.

>>918362

I'm sorry anon I did not get the message because I am on another machine. Could you please dbus it to me?

>>918315

>rando hackers

are you seriously this pathetic? professionals arent random nor dismissable.

>its not their fault they harvest and create hugely unnecessary amounts of data and put it in one sweet database that any identity fraud attacker would ejaculate just thinking about!!!

if you want to upload one image then they send your whole phone storage. that is an issue.

systemd is a good innovation...so there?

glibc has been cutting huge chunks of unneeded code, so has fvwm...things are still good. people just focus on the bad things

>>918530

Psssh… Nothin Personnel… Kid…

>>918277

Fuck Moxy Marlinspike and Signal. He's a dual citizen jew.

Cuckchan refugees ruined this board. See you faggots in the wired.

>>918509

>if you want to upload one image then they send your whole phone storage.

Except thats bullshit. They ask every single time you do anything like that.

>>917823

systemd isn't fucking bad. stop saying that. it's bloated yes, but it has features miles above any init system. if you were an actual fucking system administrator like i was you'd know that systemd is a fucking godsend

>>918547

Yes more features means better anon. I love it when my init system can make HTTP requests.

Because I like to suck cocks

>>918545

>Except that's bullshit.

I might have mixed that up with another app. I'm not sure. But since they show the user's gallery inside the app without prompt (once an initial permission for phone storage is given) and since they maintain a horrible privacy track record, I will believe they are abusing given privileged until evidence suggests otherwise. I should not have labelled it as a fact though.

>>917580

Go to bed Kemlint

>>917597

kys

>>918550

me too

>>918594

>and since they maintain a horrible privacy track record

They have a great track record. They have terrible PR. The shit every is flipping out about is people clicking "Yes I want to share subset of my information X to this app" and then the app selling the info later. The popup is clear obvious.

>>918825

And by app I don't mean the facebook app I mean apps on the facebook platform like games.

>>918825

Are you aware of (so-called) shadow profiles? Someone who does not use Facebook can't deny permissions, but they still can get profiled.

>>917555

This

>>918828

What if you block all facebook-related domains in your local DNS? And also google, amazon, twitter, and everything else that has those stupid buttons everywhere.

>>918944

this is honestly what you are supposed to do

>>918828

Shadow profile sounds really scary. In fact its just standard web analytics. So bad!

>>918567

Because some retarded faggots come to my door every day telling me to install systemd in particular. Nobody calls me a bigot for avoiding Gnome 3. But when it comes to systemd, I am suddenly a kulak who needs to be deported to central asia. The web is a fucking dogshit dildo and has given me several visits to the physicial for RSI problems. I use Links, Palememe with JS disabled, and a separate Palememe profile with JS once in a while.

To avoid:

Avoid (((CISC))) architectures

Do not buy anything that complies with (((Part 15 FCC Rules by NSA))) (basically, anything past 2011 and some around 2009)

Use (malware, leak, fingerprinting) audited FOSS GPL software then avoid (((BSD))) cucklicense.

Smite all non-free BIOS or vendor-locked bootloaders.

Boycott anything with Israel country-code in the barcode.

To innovate or bring back:

Make firewall ring -3 or -2 -1

Killswitches should be physically accessible and able to cut off power supply entirely

Anything should be easily un-screwable (in-built battery sucks).

Mandatory ferrite cores on all wires (fuck FCC ./.)

To practice:

Stop feeding the botnet. (this includes sunshine/8chan)

Practice hacking/homebrewing old hardware or consoles.

Reduce e-junk by recycling old tech.

Use ferrite cores.

Program more GPL code to combat the botnet sooner.

Always log your network connections

Wear cap on public walks to avoid CCTV botnet

Get a non-shit WLAN card or router or non-part 15 FCC modem.

Use very strong wifi password

Wipe or spoof IMEI. Some cellular networks still work with blank IMEI.

Never use or do

Nosec Windows

Any internet service which requires your face ID or government issued ID.

^protip: the government uses windows internet explorer so (((they'd))) still somehow get your information straight through the backdoorOS

Fingerprint and eye scan software on the phone or other digital service

Barebones smartphone (even those marketed as privacy phone)

Shit Apps. They literally log your serial number, fcc id, imei, imsi.

^protip: other people who should have with them by default a botnet app would leak your contact number and contact name to 3rd-letter parties in case you'd given some people your contact info

Bluetooth

^protip

Leave computer not meant as server unattended (bonus for unclosed and leaky ports/protocols)

Key escrow

>>918952

>its just standard web analytics

It goes well beyond standard.

>>919066

Anon it just tracks when you load a facebook button. Its equivalent to any other analytics system but with even fewer types of data (more of it though).

>>918944

I doubt they just label them all as theirs. Plus then all reCAPTCHA won't work if you block google, cutting off a big portion of the web (especially if using tor).

>how can we actually make things better?

become an EU citizen and start filling lawsuits

>>919879

If I hosted a website I would legit block all EU IPs, even without collecting any data in the first place, for a minimum of 6 months and probably for an entire year until this GDPR stuff blows over and the novelty has well and worn off.

>>919879

is gay marriage legal in yurop? if it is there must already be tons of darkies pretending to be gay for citizenship.

>>919906

Yas! ^w^

>>919906

Does that work?

>the other person is migrant and the country migrated to requires tons of citizenship exams and other requirements

>marriage with the country's native automagically gives that other person same citizenship

What happens after divorce? Does the citizenship carry on?

Start blocking all eurotrash traffic to any website hosted outside the eu.

>>919068

I eventually moved from blocking specific domains to outright blocking everything except the host(s) that my current session is talking to.

And I avoid sites that need all kinds of crazy stuff like recaptcha or javascript in general. Some sites that use js are still functional for browsing, so long as you don't want to write comments or whatever.

I see nothing wrong with the way tech is

t. runs Emacs/Systemd.

Nothing but fucking GNU Commies in this thread when the real answer is FOSS.

>>917723

>A non practicing jew/christcuck/mudslime can be a decent person.

hahaha

>>920276

>I eventually moved from blocking specific domains to outright blocking everything except the host(s) that my current session is talking to.

Woah this is nice, how do you set this up? Firewall, iptables rules, what?

>>917552

Die.

>>920222

You usually have to be married for a certain time (5 years or so IIRC) and you get questions asked to see if you actually give a shit about your partner, though I'm sure they are pretty lax with the latter to not be culturally insensitive.

>>917699

That's nice to say and I like what he's done with his free software thing in the context he started it but let's be honest here, when somebody says someone else is a jew they talk about their thought patterns, it doesn't really matter if they have a cut peepee. Stallman might get a pass for being super autist and doing nice shit, but he's still jewish.

>>917747

If you like lisp so much why don't you use Mezzano and shitpost from there?

>>917546 (OP)

Embrace capitalism, start making absolutely everything strictly for profit, tell potential employees asking to see your github contribution portfolio to get fucked and spit them in pantsu.

>>921229

Most lispfags are stupid obnoxious larpers.

t. lispfag

>>921055

You're gonna run into trouble trying to render HTML for websites that don't have any. What I mean is websites today have javascript render all of their HTML in the client at runtime, so the static HTML file served up has nothing but script tags in it, which is what you'll get with ftp.

You could try to sandbox it and let the javascript run in an extremely restricted environment before piping the output to your HTML renderer. Pass it through PhantomJS inside of a VM or docker image first.

>>921266

>What I mean is websites today have javascript render all of their HTML

That's not that common. Maybe I'm just too old / autistic to be visiting the hip sites which do that though.

>>917740

Lol fat chance. You'll get deplatformed from Twitter, Faceberg and Jewgle and probably Steam as well for hatespeech. All the (((video game journalists))) will slander you and your family, and you'll end up never being able to get a real job afterwards. It's worse than you know.

>>917695

Board culture was always for freedom of speech, but plz pretend you're an oldfag more

>>920609

Frame game is one good jew

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCZg5svdZRLXYS9fqO6LP9HA

>>918324

Free software means the ability to share content. So if someone paid for it, they can then share it with someone else. Lunduke has asked people not to do that, therefore it breaks the four freedoms.

>>921264

I know

t. lispfag, too

>>917823

your options are

#1 funtoo (after finally figuring out how to get around portage issues mostly everything will work always)

#2 devuan (all the downsides of debian without the botnet)

#3 some weird arch nosystemd (everything will break eventually)

#4 slackware (i tried to use it once but network didn't work after install so rip, it did have a lot of cool console fonts though!)

>>921364

>Lunduke has asked people not to do that,

Hes asked you not to. Its still within your right. He has the right to ask.

How to get rid of Tripfags like "Scheme is life" and "cuteposter":

**1. Use fake secure tripcodes

2. Dump Femboi material (just dA/Tumblr it)

3. They fuck off**

>>922691

Off-topic, fallacious and evidently false. That is literally encouragement.

You do realize everyone can see the difference between two unique tripcodes, right?

but those are some qt bois. got furry?

>>922691

>caring this much

not a problem though as this keeps the /g/ and redditfags from coming back like how /b/ keeps away the moralfags with loli and gore or bestial cp during the past

>>922386

calculate linux

>>922760

>/b/ keeps away the moralfags [...]

i remember reading a nice essay on /b/'s use of "cumdumpster" and similar memes as a defense mechanism against newfags and camwhores after the Internet Hate Machine report. it was written by a girl but you wouldn't guess it, she's a certified oldfag

>>922752

Dumping Fembois results in bans. Same with Furries.

>>917546 (OP)

>HOW THE FUCK DID PEOPLE LET THINGS GET THIS BAD.

So long as things run somewhat smoothly people don't care because they have other worries/interests.

>how can we actually make things better?

Shifting the dominant hard/software tech won't do anything but change known standards and require people to chase after said new standards to the exact same place they where before.

The only way you can make things better in the wonderfully shit world of computers is to just outright ban them.

Way too much shit in a computer be it hardware or software that requires a million libraries worth of info to understand all/keep track of it, and heinously expensive/complicated machinery to make it.

Tl:dr

When technology advanced to the point a common man with common skills couldn't make said technology in their garage with their hands in less than a month worth of weekends, was when everything turned to shit.

>>922779

>A.I doxes oldfag

>proceeds to recomend ways of being rid of (it) that won't work

Just ignore the tripfags and retards, they are literally just non-sensical spam meant for subversion of board values/culture in almost all cases.

>what is rules 29-31 of the internet

>>917678

I really do not care about LISP. I'm perfectly sated with UNIX-like kernels and operating systems

>>917602

>tfw im an idoit and dont know how to unfuck my self when it comes to my computer

>>922760

>This keeps Rerdditfags off

I though Redditfags == Tripfags, in fact we should link them to here and encourage tripping

>>923029

>I'm perfectly sated with UNIX-like kernels and operating systems

>>923074

>This to some extent. I would prefer taking UNIX even further by using a microkernel design, but in general the ideals are solid and i'm happy with it ^_^

That mentality is why we need more than 30 million lines of code just to post on this website. The UNIX ideals suck. There's a lot more out there besides Lisp machines too. The more you know, the more you realize that UNIX sucks. There are pitfalls, flaws, bugs, design mistakes, inconsistencies, workarounds, and tons more bullshit that good OSes don't have because they do things right. A good OS does more and does it better, which saves code in the OS itself and in the programs everyone else makes. It's no wonder the UNIX shills don't want you to learn about Multics, VMS, or any of the mainframe OSes.

Usually, if someone makes something newer, it's better, so they want you to know how much of an improvement the new one is. With Multics and UNIX, it's the other way around. UNIX shills don't want you to know anything about Multics because it shows how much UNIX sucks. Multics is more than 50 years ahead of UNIX because Multics in the 60s did things that UNIX can't do and will never do because it's not designed for it. Adding another 10 million or 100 million lines of code won't be able to fix UNIX.

One of the best things about Unix is that you don't even
have to rage at it yourself.  The most loyal users do it for
you.  Of course, they don't understand that that's what they
are doing.  Sometimes, they even think they are pointing out
how MODERN, ADVANCED, and PERFECT Unix is.  Other times,
they ask questions, and get answers, that look oh so
reasonable to those whose minds have been subjected to the
repeated electroshock therapy of Unix use.

Case in point is the following colloquy, from a Rutgers
support bboard (names changed for no really good reason):

	From: innocent@cs.rutgers.edu (Innocent Victim)
	Subject:Re: `which foo` error message
	Date: 18 Oct 92 17:25:29 GMT

	Verrrry weird!

        If I have no .cshrc, echo `which vacation` works
        fine.  If I have one consisting of one line:

		bind transpose-chars "^T"

        Then echo `which vacation` includes a bogus error
        message about xinit.

        It also appears to go wrong if I use other bind
        commands.

        I can live without bind commands in my .cshrc, but
        this is verrrrry strrrrange!

Which draws the response:

        From: support@other-node.rutgers.edu (Support Guru)
        Subject:Re: `which foo` error message
        Date: 19 Oct 92 06:41:24 GMT

        I'm able to duplicate your problem.  Would you
        consider using ntcsh as your shell?  It doesn't
        have this bug.  This is the free version of tcsh,
        which seems to have replaced it at most sites.  The
        current tcsh is rather unportable.  It's currently
        not being maintained, and I'd rather not try to fix
        it.  We're going to be trying to move everyone to
        ntcsh shortly.  (I think we're going to rename it
        to tcsh, and do something about converting people's
        startup files.)  It's fairly compatible with csh
        and tcsh, except that the bind command has a
        different syntax.  The command you would want in
        ntcsh is

		bindkey '^t' transpose-chars

        For the moment, you don't need it.  However when we
        finally install ntcsh as the default, we're going
        to bind ^T to show a status message by default, so
        you'll want that command.

"Fairly compatible"?!?!?!

>>923110

>hi mister lisp meanie!

>you're really annoying >_<

Shaddup kid, the old faggot's right.

>>923115

>t. someone who attended MIT and wants to make sure it wasn't for nothing

>>923110

You're using a mainframe right now though. That's what all these *nix OS are based on.

>>923121

prove it.

>>923122

he can't.

>>923121

>That's what all these *nix OS are based on.

>The PDP-11 is a series of 16-bit minicomputers

>A minicomputer, or colloquially mini, is a class of smaller computers that was developed in the mid-1960s and sold for much less than mainframe and mid-size computers from IBM and its direct competitors

>>923124

It doesn't matter what the original hardware was, because Unix and Linux has effectively replaced the mainframes for most of their purposes. Now you have supercomputers that run Linux. Surely a supercomputer is bigger than a mainframe.

It's taken the place of the mainframes, except it also got pushed onto desktops, where now you have all the Unix and C bullshit to deal with, along with the endless security problems. I'd rather be back on my Amiga 500 tbh. Hell, even DOS was better. In either case you didn't have a nanny OS telling you what you can and can't do (and pretending like it makes any difference, even though computers have tons more security problems now than they did in the early 90's and prior).

>>917884

Lisp worshippers are more cucked than BSD nerds, they love corporations. Freetards go in and write anything down that they can, but they can't let go of any code because they're narcissists who become attached to GNU flaws. BSD is the perfect balance.

>>923110

>We would need that much even if one of those other OSes became the mainstream.

Bullshit. We would probably need around 1 million lines for an OS with a GUI and GC but that OS would do a lot more and the code would only exist once on the system instead of everyone having to reinvent wheels. There's a point where good OSes get smaller when more features are added because it increases code reuse, but these features have to be well designed. You can't just add random bullshit to the OS because that won't help.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genera_(operating_system)

>The source code is more than a million lines of Lisp and available for the user to be inspected and changed. The source is relatively compact, compared to the provided functionality, due to extensive reuse

>Notice that PDP-11 Unix isn't 30 million lines.

PDP-11 UNIX didn't have a GUI or GC or even proper strings and its code was full of bugs that made 1990 UNIX look good.

>Notice that there is not a fully feature-complete lisp OS or Multics clone for today's world. You and the quote meanies are literally comparing things from several decades apart with wildly different feature sets.

UNIX weenies have this attitude that people shouldn't make anything better because "nobody uses it" which sucks because everything started out that way. Ironically, they complain that nobody uses Plan 9, but that could mean they think making new software is alright if it's worse.

>Really? I don't think it's capable of running really anything we use today, so I fail to see how that's possible.

That's because all this C/C++ code is bloat. Browsers are 16 million lines because UNIX doesn't have anything they need. Everyone has to reinvent wheels. A better OS would shrink the size of browsers and these other programs enough that it would be worth it.

>whatever those things it did are, they likely aren't particularly relevant to today. I'm sure you'll tell me all about them in a completely vague way that fails to sell me or anyone on them though.

Multics lets you access any file with CPU memory instructions. Segments are placed into directories and all memory on the computer is part of a segment.

http://multicians.org/multics-vm.html

>You do realize that one of the selling points of the microkernel design is reduced code size, right?

Microkernels without UNIX reduce code size and are more reliable. Microkernels with a UNIX emulation layer are slower and more bloated. Adding C and UNIX makes anything suck.

>I don't know why I even keep responding to you...

Because you're interested in what I have to say.

>>923121

>>923150

UNIX was an OS for a 16-bit minicomputer which is nothing at all like a mainframe. It was ported to mainframes, but they kept all the bullshit because they don't like fixing problems. They always blame the user for everything that goes wrong. Real mainframe OSes are a lot more stable, have typed files, and do multi-user the right way.

Anyway, you have to have hard links to your kernel file in
both root directories.  Then since mach is not a kernel but
a microkernel (the micro kernel binary with symbol tables,
debugger, etc is a svelte 950k on a MIPS box, unix emulation
is only another 1500k; I actually *needed* the extra 10 megs
on the root partition) you have to create a mach_servers
directory and populate it with various programs that mach
uses to emulate unix.

>> I once went to hear a talk by Thompson at MIT.  Thompson
>> said one of the professors had said to him, "I hate you.
>> UNIX stopped all research in operating systems."  Thompson
>> apologized.

    Actually, it's more the hardware vendors fault.  For
about 15 years now, the solution has been to throw more
hardware (memory, cpu cycles, graphics co-processors, and so
on) at the users.  UNIX has the dubious advantage of looking
more like "a real operating system" to the microprocessor
crowd (who are used to CPM/MSDOS/etc).

    So they think that by installing unix, it makes their
system into a "real computer".  In fact, unix is just a
minicomputer operating system (at best).  So what they end
up with is a box with more MIPs than a 70s mainframe, more
memory than a 70s mainframe, more disk than a 70s mainframe,
and a 70s minicomputer operating system.  And it runs about
as fast as a 70s minicomputer, asn supports as many users.

The wonder is that anyone is surprised.

>>923253

>There's a point where good OSes get smaller when more features are added because it increases code reuse, but these features have to be well designed.

This sounds good in theory. I don't believe it can be done in reality.

Why do people tolerate Eventbrite for events? I'd rather have some other way of verifying attendance, and I want to at least stay anonymous. I hate this.

>>923074

funtoo is just better, uses git for updating portage, comes with a precompiled kernel so you dont have to spend 10 hours configuring one, and has NO systemd support at all, unlike gentoo which has systemd components pre installed, and will install systemd (not enable) as a dep unless you specifically tell portage not to (and then will run into issues with things) gentoo is only good if you are running a computer with like powerpc or sparc or any non standard arch otherwise there is no reason not to use funtoo

>>923336

I still have to print off PDFs of QR codes, usually that is an option. Stop being such a normalfaggot.

comfy anon here typing from elinks :)

>>923253

You're taking this too literally. Unix is mainframe in spirit, not in direct descendant. But it is from that era, and serves similar needs. You have virtual memory, you have multiuser, and file permissions, and other stuff you'd expect to find on a mainframe. And none of that shit belongs on a PC, at least not one I'd enjoy using.

>>923336

>and I want to at least stay anonymous

Remember you ALWAYS have to use your real name on all websites. It is physically impossible to use a fake name.

>>927712

>uses git for updating portage

Your reasons are baloney. You can make Gentoo sync using git too. If you don't want to configure the kernel you can just use genkernel. Gentoo does not have systemd components pre installed. Yes it's possible to install systemd from the repositories, but it takes two seconds to mask those packages.

>>917546 (OP)

>HOW THE FUCK DID PEOPLE LET THINGS GET THIS BAD.

>how can we actually make things better?

You can make things better by not making slide threads, and going back to cuckchan >>>/g/ and staying there.

>>928004

E

>>927776

Family PCs are a thing. It's useful to have multiple accounts and file permissions in a single machine for that use case.

>>929465

(((Rust)))

>>929465

>>929545

From the people who took a okay browser and turned into shit, brings you

RUST

because finding reasons to incorporate an sql engine within your browser for managing configuration instead of a text file just wasn't bloat enough.

>>929403

Not really anymore, when you can buy a $100 tablet or netbook, or even a used laptop. In the 80's and 90's, having only one computer in the house was a lot more common, but the ironic thing is back then the OS didn't try to be like a multiuser mainframe. Most home PCs just ran Win9x even at the turn of the century. And now that every PC runs a complicated mainframe-like OS, everyone has their own computer.

>>929595

Happy Hacker? GPL is a fag ideal. Qt is better in that regard.

Of you want open source, write a proper audit license, no leftism there.

>>929595

>Every line of code you write from now on should have only profit purpose as ultimate goal

That is how things got so bad. Exploitation of the end user is normalised.

>Bill Gates

Do you think we can convince him to donate a trillion to free software?

>>929701

>That is how things got so bad

End users got what they want. They don't want CLI bullshit they want iphone apps.

>>929702

>End users got what they want.

In some way. Many didn't want to be given ads and data mined. I don't think they wanted it, they either accepted it as unavoidable or were apathetic.

>They don't want CLI bullshit they want iphone apps.

>implying free == CLI

This isn't the 90s any more unfortunately

>>929701

see >>929702 and you don't even know what exploitation is you brainlet commie retard, open dictionary once in a while.

Furthermore nobody is forcing you to use software that doesn't align with thy holiness' finest palate. You can just fuck off right to some esoteric software ascetism where everything you write you give away like true saint, and eat nothing or if thy holiness for some reason has to eat (maybe you aren't giving enough quality code away for free so not properly holy, could be that), you can work morally proper labour to thy holiness' liking on the side.

>>929545

>(((argument)))

>>929569

>don't use rust goys because of this other thing

>not judging rust on its own merits

The niggerbrain kikes are begging you to not use Rust. Think for yourselves anons. What could be better than using your enemies tools to defeat them?

>>929595

>Stop contributing and start making money

There's the key. Use Rust to make money, empower our cause, attack the enemy, and contribute nothing back to the project.

>>929690

A license that fit capitalism

>>929713

>Many didn't want to be given ads and data mined.

Yes they did. The want to watch ads over pay $2 a month for something. People don't actually give a shit about ads or data mining. You can tell them about data mining, they will complain about it, they can fully understand whats going on, and then keep on using facebook.

>>930032

>People don't actually give a shit about ads or data mining.

It's more that they've been stuck in shit for so long that they don't even know there's a shit-free alternative. I have ublock installed for my organization across FF and I've had multiple employees tell me that they've installed the plugin on their home computer after it blocked youtube ads etc. Granted my organization only consists of a few hundred people but just depriving the megacorps of that much ad revenue and possibly influencing normalfags to fight against advertisers feels pretty great.

>>930094

>they don't even know there's a shit-free alternative

The shit free alternatives are shit

>hey anons we should congregate and organize to protect and uphold the current order and standards of what we love, to influence the normalfags so they don't fall to darkness like their simian brains are always inclined to

>ABLOOBLOO 2MUCHWERK I WANNA WATCH MUH ANIMES IN PEECE SUPERIOR NIPPON 4EVER HAHA MUH DED GAYMERZGATEZ

>marxist and (((jewish))) poison werk4free and subvert everything that is good and trash it

>WTF THEY GET TO MUH ANIMES HOW DID DIS APPEN

Repeat ad infinitum.

The solution is to outdo the poison and ACTUALLY take responsibility instead of handing it over to those faggots, because god forbid they organize and accomplish more than us.

Look at >>>/pol/ and the unintentional amount of influence they ended up commanding. Of course they're borked now as all good things must come to an end, but a persistent issue I see is that anons are ridiculously informed and theoretically have the power to achieve great things together. Invariably, however, they all make stupid excuses to not take action (durr im depressed and want to end myself) and thus the soyniggers outdo them because at least they weren't complacent in pushing their agenda.

>hey start a company to compete on the market with those dumb fucks

<TOO HARD

>hey let's start a project together

<drops

Look at >>>/eternalarchive/, a project that got dropped instead of continued when the TPP was no longer a threat circa 2015-2016.

Even I'm not immune; I've got several pushes to sperg about on several boards here but I always slide them off instead of ==JUST DOING THEM.== Which reminds me, I need to catch some shuteye and then get those cultural campaigning posts out. E3 was a good wakeup call to oldfags about Nippon in danger despite the KnowYourMeme cancer infecting the big board.

>>930106

>He does not realize that normies can have everything explained to them, have alternatives installed for them, have a week of free training, and then still use botnet

>>918544

You mean shitty neocities websites?

>>930244

He probably does realize that normies are 1 degree above niggertrash, but is making progress despite that. Stop your defeatism you fucking faggot, or at least take it to Shitter, Fagbook, and /leftypol/ to demoralize the leftist bugchasers.

>Look at >>>/eternalarchive/, a project that got dropped instead of continued when the TPP was no longer a threat circa 2015-2016.

That's something I would join. I love archival. I never heard of it because I only joined /tech/ this year.

There are times people band together and try things. Loads of times. It's just maintaining that momentum and promoting the project being the issue. I'm actually impressed at how the /g/ternet project is going, since a /g/ based meshnet seems futile to me (but I'd love to be proven wrong).

re: eternalproject : just lose the TPP theme and generalise it. Make it an anon archival project. Get /a/ and /co/ to use it as a media distribution service to back up Mega links.

>>930239

Well >>>/polmedia/ and >>>/poltech/ can be used for projects, and even /co/ wants something good e.g.>>>/co/1002332

Also, please use >>>/pdfs/ and >>>/eternalarchive/ with >>>/ipfs/ or inclibuql666c5c4.onion or inclib.i2p to share books.

>>930518

Some of those seem pretty useful. Thanks.

What does inclib stand for? Is it themed, or is it for general media archival?

>cuteposter can't tripfag

Time to dump pozzed Tumblr/deviantArt images, people

Clean the /cuteboys/ off /tech/

>>930582

It is the politically incorrect library from /pdfs/'s monthly book thread

This place is starting to loose creativity. Even the mentioning of >>/hydrus/ is rare at this point.

https://github.com/ErisBlastar/cplusequality is basically C++ but cancer

https://github.com/haasn/-g-pl is a programming language for 4/g/

https://github.com/irungentoo/toxcore is the insecure Tox client

https://gitgud.io/m712/goyt and https://gitgud.io/blazechan/blazechan are both replacements

https://github.com/smugdev/smugboard is an IPFS imageboard

https://github.com/DistributedMemetics/DM is really not going anywhere

And more imageboard software that I can count

https://github.com/majestrate/nntpchan

https://github.com/DogMan8/CatChan

https://github.com/bakape/meguca

>>930704

And 2 emoji based languages

https://github.com/4Lang/4

https://github.com/emojicode/emojicode