jgoerzen

You are correct. That mirror is from ftp.kermitproject.org, which doesn't have all of the things that Columbia's website has.

I have since added additional mirrors which have everything you're looking for.

These servers don't carry the "binaries" groups. They carry the discussion groups, so there should be no piracy going on there.

Sure!

alt.arts.poetry.comments

alt.bbs.synchronet

alt.comp.software.firefox

alt.fan.usenet

alt.folklore.computers

alt.os.linux.debian

alt.pub.coffeehouse.amethyst (This is somewhat low-traffic but is unique; people write in the third person imagining themselves stepping into a friendly coffeehouse)

comp.infosystems.gopher

comp.os.linux.misc

comp.os.linux.networking

comp.risks (moderated)

comp.sys.raspberry-pi

comp.unix.shell

gnu.emacs.help

rec.food.cooking (eh, 60% flames, 40% interesting)

rec.music.classical.recordings (surprisingly active)

Yes. Many groups are pretty much dead, but there are some that are active (a handful that are QUITE active). The quality of the active groups ranges from "60% flames" to "these are Ph. D's talking to each other about things I will never understand". Though most, of course, are somewhere in-between.

Compare this to Reddit however you like.

You may be interested to note that NNCP integrated Yggdrasil support recently (though you can also run Yggdrasil at the OS level). Yggdrasil is an always-encrypted IPv6-based mesh, and is a perfect fit for something like ad-hoc wifi (since the nodes can discover a route to each other based even on RF paths).

Yggdrasil can also run as an overlay network atop standard Internet (IPv4 or IPv6), or both. It will opportunistically find peers on a local broadcast domain and find routes to other networks over the standard Internet if need be.

Feel free to drop me a note if you like; I had a very similar experience with SSB. NNCP, while it has a bit of a learning curve, Just Works. It processes thousands of packets for me every day (hourly ZFS snapshot backups for every filesystem I have), some of which are huge, and it Just Works.

I think Syncthing is an under-appreciated tool! I wrote more about it at https://changelog.complete.org/archives/10219-a-simple-delay...

https://www.complete.org/parallel-processing-of-filespooler-... discusses parallel processing in Filespooler. This isn't a design goal and may not be the best fit, but when everything's just a file, some tricks are possible here.

Another interesting use case is one-to-many and many-to-many; https://www.complete.org/filespooler/ describes those.

I'm the guy that wrote the blog article that got posted here. So, I'm dusting off my really old HN account, to step up and say that I am very sorry it felt depressing to you, because that was not my intent.

In fact, as I said in the post, I use Matrix, I love Matrix, I evangelize Matrix (especially to Discord people), it has made a lot of strides lately. I had a previous post on distributed offline-capable IMs at https://changelog.complete.org/archives/10205-roundup-of-sec... and I got so much feedback to "don't let people use Signal, switch to Matrix!" that I specifically was addressing Matrix as a Signal replacement in the post. (I regret it wasn't super clear that's what I was doing.)

I'm going to address your points in a sort of different order, starting with:

#5, encryption. The benefit to Signal here is that encryption is NOT optional. A user just knows everything is going to be encrypted. 1-to-1 chatting, group chats ("rooms" to Matrix), voice and video calling, attachments, EVERYTHING is E2E encryption and user error can't result in things being sent in plaintext.

Now as you say there are reasons that, say, #fx-desktop-community:mozilla.org with its 1100 users shouldn't be using E2EE. However, when talking about Matrix *as a Signal replacement*, the fact that E2E is only default but not mandatory for 1-to-1 chats, and optional but not default for multi-user chats (in Element), this makes it a lot easier for non-tech-savvy end users to goof and send messages in plaintext. A secure replacement for Signal needs to not have that option. Perhaps a "secure everything" mode in Element would help.

2. Fundamentally, there is a deeper issue here: for every Matrix user, there exists at least one, and possibly more, single points of failure. As far as I know, Synapse itself isn't clusterable, so for every Matrix homeserver, the failure of, say, a single CPU will render everyone on that server unable to communicate. I say "possibly more" because many people probably will run a singleton PostgreSQL instance also, though PostgreSQL can be clustered. Or even an upgrade to Synapse there would take people offline, etc.

For me to be able to recommend an IM to people, it must pass the "I can rely on this thing to get help if my car breaks down at night" test. Right now, Matrix doesn't give me that level of comfort. Yes, it's getting better. Yes, various hosting options exist. But still, if the homeserver you're using has a bad CPU or Synapse OOMs it or whatever, your messages aren't going through in a timely manner.

3. I am glad to hear that voice and video calling are getting so close. However, I want to still add that having two different VOIP systems -- one that can handle precisely 2 participants and another that can handle more -- is jarring for end users and admins alike. People are used to being able to tap "add participant" to their calls and this is a UX issue for people coming from other IM systems.

1. I'm glad to hear these RAM issues are getting better. I've spent a fair bit of time tuning that cache parameter, from its default of 0.5 down to 0.2 (which resulted in drastically unacceptable performance) up to the other recommendation of 2.0 (which still resulted in OOMs). I am in some large Debian, Firefox, and Matrix rooms, with over a thousand participants each -- though some of those, at least, are gated from IRC where such a scale is a non-issue.

I've been following Dendrite's "are we Synapse yet?" page with interest and excitement. I am looking forward to it being ready to use! But as I stated in my post, and as you are surely aware, it's not there yet, at least based on the "are we Synapse yet?" page.

4. It's not actually that simple. A person is most likely going to want at LEAST Synapse and Element Web. Most are probably also going to need coturn, Dimension, Jitsi, synapse-admin, and maybe an identity/directory server. The downloading of the software is the easy bit. The hard bit is getting all the bits talking to each other properly, with various JSON config files, keys, DNS entries, SSL certs, well-known files, ports, etc.

I set up my own Matrix server due to difficulties with the integrations at t2bot, some limitations in the IRC bridge I had to work around, etc.

Also to those wondering why Matrix and not XMPP: I used to run ejabberd and an XMPP service. XMPP has (or at least, HAD) a real issue when being used with multiple clients - delivering messages to the wrong place, not syncing history, etc. Matrix is far better with those things. Also Jingle in XMPP land barely ever worked, last I checked.

An aside: I try not to comment on non-federated corporate-control sites (of which HN is an example), but hopefully if you reply I'll get an email or something. You are also welcome to engage me on my blog or on Mastodon, where I first surfaced many of these ideas (and did tag the Matrix Mastodon account). Or email me.

Once again, thanks for what you do. Matrix is great for many use cases and will be great for more in the future. But I want to be clear-eyed about how it compares to Signal for the secure IM use case, today.

I bought it off eBay a few weeks ago.

As to why - sitting in front of emacs with a clicky model M keyboard produces a very different frame of mind. I am more focused and more deliberate in what I type (one doesn't just type ls /usr/bin on such a thing). Although it's by no means my primary computing device, I do find myself going down there for at least a little while on most days. It is a pleasant break, a change of scenery, a different mental state.

I got it, and my vt420 and vt510, after thinking about the bifurcated nature of computing history. Although I started with computers in the 80s, it was the PC side of things. The Unix/"big iron" simply wasn't accessible to many in those days. I have spent decades doing work day in, day out in what amounts to a fancy vt510 emulator (xterm). I wanted to use the real thing. Also it got my son to play zork with me.

I wrote about it here: https://changelog.complete.org/archives/10013-connecting-a-p...

and here: https://changelog.complete.org/archives/10031-resurrecting-a...

I have a vt420, vt510, and IBM3151 and not one of them do RTS/CTS like we'd expect. The vt510 can apparently do that on the DTR/DSR pins, but the vt420 and below cannot, and neither can the 3151.

Translation: "Linux is eating our lunch. If you can't beat 'em, join 'em."

Linux has already thoroughly trounced Windows in mobile (Android). It's done so in the web space. MS still has a strong foothold in enterprise, but it doesn't take a genius to see Linux continuing to expand on at least the backend in enterprise as well.

With more apps being delivered over the web, and web browsers being cross-platform, the desktop choice becomes less OS-centric for rote workers.

I can see this as Microsoft looking into a future where they lose relevance because of ChromeOS eating up the low end and MacOS eating up the high end, and they're left with institutional traction. Which they can coast on for many years, but not forever.

Hi Michael,

Thanks for writing this. I wrote a response here: https://changelog.complete.org/archives/9971-a-partial-defen...

The tl;dr version is I agree with you about some of the things you mention, but also feel like there's an element of personal preference for web-based tools showing through.

I didn't go into detail in the article, but the server in question is running a Supermicro X10SLH-F-O motherboard, ECC RAM, and a Haswell CPU, in a Rosewill RSV-L4411 4U chassis. Is there a hardware problem here? For sure. But you can't write this off as being some dusty overclock mess bought at someone's garage sale.

I have, incidentally, seen this in corporate environments on traditionally-engineered sever-class hardware as well. This is just a much more easily-discussed case.

I never said Debian comes out on top. In fact, I went out of my way to say "use the right tool for the job." There are cases where FreeBSD is better and cases where Debian is better. To take something as complex as a modern operating system and say one or the other is always better would be foolish.

But, to address the questions: suspend does work out of the box for many laptops on Debian, including suspend on lid close, and has for years.

ZFS as a volume manager - I specifically addressed this. ZFS is not a suitable volume manager for everyone because it is fairly rigid once a zpool is set up. You cannot expand a raidz1 nearly as easily as a RAID-5 in Linux. (You have a stripe the data across another storage group.) You can't shrink a zpool at all. These are limitations that matter in some, but not all, setups.

Support of alien filesystems may be irrelevant for many servers, but it is not for all. But anyhow, people use an OS for more than just servers.

Virtualization -- believe it or not, there are people that need ways to run Windows. Sometimes a whole lot of Windows.

Dropbox -- lacking something that can to instant auto-syncs is a feature? That's pretty presumptious.

There is a big difference on desktop environments and configuration. Install Debian and with a simple selection of "desktop environment", it boots up into a working DE. FreeBSD -- not so much. Install a bunch of packages, exit some polkit and hal files, and then you'll get there. Well, if you thought to run pkg inside typescript so you see what pkla files to edit.

Yes. And in fact I tested it that way first.

But with the CD route, I trust them with something that cost a few cents, and with an interface they already know (play, stop, and next track buttons). Way easier for them and far fewer consequences for trips or spilled water!

"I gave her a VAX" made me smile. You are awesome.

Absolutely I do. See my blog for examples. The other stuff is more important than the computer, and they spend far more time outside than they do at the computer. One of their favorite activities is to build their own river systems using a slow trickle of water out of a hose & pipe onto a small mound of dirt.

Awesome. That is a wonderful idea.

I love hearing this.

I have fond memories of doing things with my dad -- he once let me dismantle an old lawnmower engine so I could learn how it works -- but although he was very supportive of my computer interests, I had surpassed his skill level early enough that I didn't have a lot of time with him on it.

I hope my boys have memories of me like you have of your dad.

I would love to hear how they react. I'm excited for you just reading this!

<grin>, I do think we agree on the big picture, perhaps.

I completely agree with starting them where they are.

And yes, they do not yet know what a for loop is, or what a compiler is, or what it truly means to install something. But they do know sequencing of commands and cause and effect.

If a 2-year-old wants to pluck strings on a guitar, as ours has, then great! Maybe they will sing with their random music sometimes, and as a parent, that's beautiful. It is probably not teaching them actual skill in the technique of playing a guitar, but it's teaching them: 1) that "I can do this", 2) this thing make music, and 3) this is fun and merits more exploration.

I think I did meet them where they were at, and part of doing that was going ahead and installing a GUI for them now. There is no reason to believe that my excitement over a CLI when I was 5 was something unique to me. I think that many more children could do and enjoy it than are given the chance.

The last version of Windows I used seriously was 3.1.

Last winter, I suddenly had to fix problems in Windows Server 2008. I may have been a bit slow, but yes, I can fix an OS I've never used.

If you have a good knowledge base, and the experience to provide a good intuition, you can figure them out.

I would, incidentally, consider Debian to be a modern OS, and a CLI to be a modern UI. If they can string together commands in bash, I'm sure they'll be just fine with Windows.

Here's what I'd suggest.

Find an old keyboard, one you don't mind taking some abuse. Plug it in to a computer somewhere, put it in a 80x25 text mode where the letters are nice and big.

Then log in and let them bash at it randomly to their heart's desire. They'll be able to make lights on the keyboard turn on and off, and see the effect on the screen of what they do on the keyboard. It might only last a few minutes at first, and that's fine.

Once they can recognize letters pretty reliably, they could start with some simple CLI things. At almost 3, Oliver can log himself in, but I usually have to point to each letter in his username before he hits it. He knows his letters, but not his QWERTY, yet. He also has some issues with repeating letters. But once he's logged in, it's mostly random mashing at the keyboard for him yet too. I bet it won't be for long though.

As to age, each child is different. Follow their cues. If they happily sit on your lap for 15 minutes, seriously studying, or laughing at the hilarious error messages they make, then it's time. Or if they start wanting to use your computer. If they run off after 30 seconds, try again in a month or two.

<grin> There are a whole bunch of excited preschoolers out there running sl now, apparently, judging from the comments here: http://changelog.complete.org/archives/6359-a-proud-dad

Perhaps my first sentence overstated it a bit; I was reacting to the person that was "a little queasy." Sure, it's possible to use an iPad in a way that is not actively bad, and probably beneficial.

But it's still a box sealed shut that someone else built. And, perhaps most devastating, it's designed to just work out of the box.

I'm drawing an analogy to the maker movement here. I don't want childrens' experience to be defined by others, or to live in the boxes invented by others, whenever I can avoid it. Left to their own devices, they invent their own boxes all the time. I would have never imagined that one of our trees would be a pretend locomotive, but there you go.

My first computer, a TRS-80 CoCo II, turned on to a BASIC prompt. Yes, you could run software others wrote. But you were almost inevitably learning concepts about the computer, too - how can you copy data from one disk to another when you only have one drive and your RAM is smaller than it, for instance? Sure, you can use something Tuxpaint on an iPad, but you wouldn't be using it on something you built.

Apple's ecosystem is the antithesis of the "I can do it myself" approach. (If you do jailbreak it, then I start to see some more value.)

Linux is the embodiment of the "I can do it myself" approach. I remember as a kid opening up a hex editor and modifying the boot sector of a floppy so that when you forgot it in the drive at boot time, you saw my name instead of the "Non system disk or disk error." But my boys will have source code, if they should ever want to use it. How cool is that?

I disagree. A blank command line is freedom. It's an invitation to do whatever you like. To discover. To try. To fail. To explore.

If you have 5 (or 50) icons to choose from, where's the blank slate? Where's the great outdoors? Where's the "I built it myself!"?

The boys love to eat the food from our garden that they helped plant and nurture a lot more than food from a store.

If they have ownership and freedom to explore, engagement is natural.

If you don't start with the preconceived notion that the command line is too hard or not engaging enough for children, maybe you will find that it isn't.

The iPad, to me, represents everything that is wrong with raising children.

First of all, I should say that computers are a small part of my boys' life. We live on a farm. They get lots and lots of time to explore outdoors, climb in trees, and all that good stuff that so few kids get these days. That is really more important to me.

You are probably right that they would also be delighted at an iPad. But what would that achieve? A simulation of things they could do with paper, out the front door? Reinforce the message that cool things are expensive and welded shut?

Research shows, and I firmly believe, that children need unstructured play. They need to be able to pretend, to create, to examine, to fail cheaply. Lots of toys and gadgets don't foster this. Don't get me wrong; our boys have plenty of toys, but we try hard to keep it from being so vast an amount like so many people have. When we travel, we don't bring a lot of toys. Walking in downtown Portland, for instance, they might find some leaves and make a game out of throwing them in the air while we walk.

We built this computer from spare parts. They were active participants in that. When it breaks, we will take it apart together and look at it. Maybe we will open it up other times just to see what it's like. This machine was free; it was built from old parts in my basement that I had discarded.

I vehemently disagree that more cost == better experience for children.

Two other things they've loved that were also free to me: an adding machine about to be thrown out (they love printing "cards" with it), and a manual typewriter (think of all the mechanical discovery awaiting one of those.)

Outdoors, they invent all sorts of games. They both have picked out trees on our yard that are "trains", designating branches as various controls and sometimes inviting me to ride on their train.

At 3, Jacob knew his alphabet and could find keys on the keyboard. He learned enough to remember, by rote or otherwise, that "worm" launched the worm game and "sl" launched steam locomotives, sometimes using a cheat sheet for help. He could not read or comprehend responses very well. (He derived a LOT of enjoyment from typing nonsense commands, then having me read the error messages that started with BASH)

At 5, he reads well. He is not good at spelling - one reason I give him a short cheat sheet - but he can make out a lot of what's going on. Not everything, of course.

We didn't start them on computers from the cradle. We read books to them a lot, and play games involving numbers and words. Jacob loves Dr. Seuss books and word games.

But lest anyone think we're some sort of tiger parents, we also open the front door and let them go play outside, maybe sending some sidewalk chalk with them if they want it.

I got a TRS-80 at about 5. It had only a CLI (BASIC-based). That was a huge incentive for me to learn to read. Nobody else in the house knew about computers then either, so unless I wanted to wait for my dad to get home from work, it was me and the manual.

I'm saving that for next week. ;-)

(seriously.)

It's really very simple for a child. C-x C-s, C-x C-c, and arrow keys. All they really need to do.

I thought about vim, but I think it would lead to too many confusing situations.

I have a printed "cheat sheet" up there for the boys. It has commands and keyboard shortcuts. They sometimes forget it exists, but at least Jacob can read and follow directions on it without any trouble.

I think it's great that you broke the system so badly. You then got to fix it, and you also learned that you have the ability to fix it even when it's terribly broken.

Ultimately, if you don't have the ability to break things, you don't truly have the ability to experiment and discover.

This is accurate to some degree. They would have been excited without xmonad, or with gdm instead of startx, because it was something new and involved a mouse. They were super-excited about that part.

Part of my point was that we don't have to spoon-feed things to children for them to be excited about. My boys don't yet have any concept of editor wars, or OS wars, or window manager / desktop wars, and are excited about whatever they have - especially when I juice it up a bit for their interests.

I am very intentional about spending time with them every day. And you are right that they are happy to spend time with me, doing whatever. Maybe playing hide and seek (a recent favorite is hide and seek outdoors with radios), simply swinging on the swing set, playing catch. We recently built a fire ring out of some surplus brick. They helped, and enjoy helping gather kindling and cook there.

But what I'm describing here is an utter delight that is beyond the everyday. The were super excited about this. It would probably take going camping or visiting a train museum to get them more excited ;-)

Incidentally, a used manual typewriter is another excellent and cheap way to give children a fun indoor activity that also engages their exploration. Think of all the moving parts in that!