Forest @forestjohnson@pixie.town

@teal@cannibal.cafe @em@cassilda.house @mauve

At least last time I was looking at this, the libp2p libraries worked OK for apps, just not for browsers / interoperability w/ browser stuff.

I think a large part of the problem is that what libp2p is trying to do is kinda impossible, the image that they "sell" where it "just works" with pure p2p and no server, is and always will be unrealistic. Because of the "original sin" of ipv4 and NAT, there will always be a need for a server / rendezvous point.

I still use the UPnP client from libp2p, I its really good IMO. https://git.sequentialread.com/forest/go-libp2p-nat

I think webrtc is the way to go for publishing cuz it supports browsers, I like the Pion webrtc libraries cuz I can fairly easily get server<->server, server<->browser, and browser<->browser, working, and it has a feature where you only have to open / forward one UDP port on the server so it makes it easier to host. WebTorrent is also pretty cool.

@mauve have you ever tried to write an application that works like this?

I can tell you from experience, it's practically impossible.

- everyone is in ipv4 NAT jail
- ipv6 when???
- if your app doesn't have a URL, who's going to use it? ( network effect of established platforms )

I agree that this is how things **should** be! But its unclear to me how to get there. Or even where to start.

IMO we have to start with self-hosting, then move to community/group hosting, then try to use those trusted community-run publicly dial-able server constellations as a pseudo-standard for how to bootstrap more P2P oriented apps. But I think it still has to load in the web browser the whole time. Any sort of publishing use case will have to be compatible w/ unmodified browser.

But hey, with the new WebTransport API, that's going to get a lot less painful soon!!

Pulling fs layer

@j3s I think we're talking about slightly different things / the silly analogies are breaking down 😛

Straws were probably a thing to accommodate drive thrus and car culture -- everyone gets a disposable babby sippy cup so that when you drive over a bump your sugar syrup water doesn't go splashing everywhere. I can argue straws are a safety feature with costs / negative externalities.

Idk what a straw-ftware even is in this analogy, but I'm not sure I'm totally against it. You don't need JS to build a website, but in case you do, it sure is a breath of fresh air that React calls it `dangerouslySetInnerHTML` instead of the innocent-seeming XSS vector `element.innerHTML = xyz`.

Safety is annoying, the world is annoying, society is annoying, inertia and network effects are annoying. But I would rather try to pay the cost to play in our flawed sandbox, I don't want to refuse and become a hermit

@j3s

I like convenience on computers, cuz when I pollute my disk/ram with used straws, I can just back up the stuff I care about, wipe it, and start over. But I get what you're saying and I agree, digital consumerism is the worst and it **feels really good** to find meaningful ways to step outside it.

> if I am to have faults, I would rather they be my own

-- vihart

I love my "cast iron" or "ceramic mug" tools like picopublish and stuff... Can be a pain and has a lot of flaws / limits, but I can delight my friends with url file names like

https://picopublish.sequentialread.com/files/bonesaw_eyes_completely_closed.jpg

@j3s yeah, this is true, to me this is the greatest tragedy of our age.

I don't have any solutions / answers really, besides "it only takes a small group of people to maintain the code, and then everyone can use it".

I'm hoping that as usability pros age out of the workforce ( tech worker FIRE grows ) this can be more realistic, but right now it seems to be just hope.

@j3s I'm not even sure its hyper-optimizing for usability as much as its hyper-optimizing for increasing sales and profit.

There are tons of places where usability is sacrificed intentionally in order to maximize profit. A usable product wouldn't have planned obsolescence, and a usable product wouldn't try to prevent the user from unsubscribing.

@j3s if we reject / cancel usability wholesale, because it is the primary tool of surveillance capitalism, I think that works to undermine any potential possible future for computing outside of the context of surveillance capitalism.

It might work for you, that's fine. But we also need things that will encourage those who have never tried to write a program or host a website before.

And at any rate, I think the cast iron pan analogy is flawed. I think you like cast iron BECAUSE its usable. Its more forgiving and easier to use while cooking, and it lasts longer, it becomes uniquely your own.

I'd argue Teflon is LESS usable because it releases extremely reactive/toxic flourine gas at high temps. Metal utensils / dish soap will permanently damage it and make it more likely to degrade.

Have you ever tried cooking with one of those new non stick Ceramic pans? They're great, even better than cast iron IMO as long as you handle them carefully to avoid shattering. And I think the same goes for software: we can do better. Steal the usability from capital and give it to the next generation, no login or API key required.

This has already been happening quietly for years and I think without it, communities like these would not even exist.