1. 2

    What are the things that a server would need to be considered a tilde-like?

    1. 3

      As far as I’m concerned, any public Unix/Linux/BSD server offering shell accounts that spawned in the wake of tilde.club or related itself with the tildeverse would be a fit. Though this is just a quick spontaneous outline and I don’t claim to have this right. Any other opinions?

      1. 1

        I have been putting together a list based on research I did for a paper on the history of public access UNIX systems, and it includes tildes. Currently the list has the recent or current systems as well as around 300 systems dating back to the early 1980’s. It is just in a spreadsheet, but I have been looking for a way to publish it in an interactive medium so it can keep growing and start accumulating user and sysadmin stories from the historical systems.

        ~gauntlet, ~ben, or anyone: contact me if you’d be interested on collaborating on such a project.

        My preference is to have a strong command line interface to the list, but obviously there will be interest in other views (like http).

        1. 2

          I have started on something similar a while ago, but did not put too much work in there over the past months. I’d be happy to merge this and collaborate.

          1. 2

            Awesome. I will shoot you an email and we can talk about moving it forward.

        1. 1

          i try to keep this list up-to-date as well :)

          1. 2

            Aaaand there’s already two more servers I missed. Thanks for sharing your list. Also, you’re welcome to scrape my page, of course.

            Also also: neat, a wiki! The name seems general enough to be used as a common wiki for the entire tildeverse. I was going to address this in the next few days, since I’d like to have one wiki to collect all the tildeverse’s lore instead of little chunks spread here and there. (With the data mirrored elsewhere of course, because fuck centralization.)

            Are there any plans to do so or do you consider tilde.wiki as strictly centered on tilde.team?

            1. 1

              I didn’t have a plan for it so I just set up nginx to serve ~team’s wiki on that domain. I’ve got some hard-coded links to stuff on there but I’d be open to using it for something else if there’s interest!

          1. 5

            We happen to be using a fork of it here on the tildeverse: https://ttm.sh

            1. 2

              Oh! Didn’t know that, even though I could have sworn that I read the list of services on tildeverse.org numerous times. My bad. Thanks for pointing this out.

              1. 1

                I was just about to comment that

              1. 2

                looks like ~team’s is out of date :x (hasn’t been updated since july 10!)

                time to fix it.

                1. 3

                  fixed. should be good to go

                  1. 2

                    Oh, I didn’t even notice. I only checked wether it was there in the first place. Anyay, good thing you fixed it. :3

                  1. 1

                    too real… but try explaining that to the marketing departments…

                    1. 2

                      “what do you mean we can’t track our customers’ every move?”

                      1. 2

                        While I’m not a fan of tracking, the bloated bit of pages was that it loads megabytes of transpiled javascript. Trackers / ads can be done in less code and asynchronously to make for a less bloated web experience where we all “win”.

                        1. 1

                          heh i wouldn’t call that a “win” but yes there are many better ways to do it.

                          1. 1

                            I’d call a less bloated Internet a win. Did we win everything? Certainly not, but I don’t believe any of us believe there will ever be a singular motion to absolve all of our qualms with the Internet in one fell swoop.

                            1. 1

                              A less bloated spying apparatus is still a spying apparatus. Just one that hides itself better.

                              That’s not a win in any fashion.

                              1. 1

                                Unless if I’m mistaken, the article we’re replying to is against a bloated Internet in favor of a more slimmed down version where we aren’t downloading megabytes of data to read a blog.

                                Now with that in mind, this thread was about how we cannot attain this from the perspective of running ads / tracking software. So my proposal is that megabytes of JavaScript is not needed to serve ads / track users, which brings us closer to the win of “a less bloated Internet” where a pivot to handle the finances of websites through ads / user data is not needed.

                                I’m not advocating here that ads or tracking is good, but rather it’s something many sites are using and the current state of the web makes those sites bloated, which this article is wanting to encourage the reduction of. So if we could have those companies provide less bloated scripts, this would be a win for “a less bloated Internet” (and not “a no tracking / ads Internet” that it appears you and ben are considering to be the only way to win here).

                                1. 1

                                  Better, and more efficient spying on people isn’t a “win” in any way, shape, or form.

                                  1. 1

                                    The current state of the Internet is you either lose money hosting a site, you have some paywall / sell content on the site, or you run ads on it to fund the site. So if you want to not charge your users but still find a way to keep the website online, you’re probably using ads (e.g. most of the Internet). What I’m saying is that the path of least resistance to making the Internet faster is to remove the bloat from ads, not to tell everyone to just bleed cash for their sites on principle by removing ads from their sites.

                                    If your opinion is that a faster Internet is not a win in any way, shape, or form; I think we’re at an impasse.

                                    1. 1

                                      You can run ads, without javascript, and without bloat, have a faster internet, and not spy on your users.

                                      1. 1

                                        Sure, but not all ad companies adhere to that standard of running without javascript/bloat, which is what I was proposing.

                                        1. 1

                                          Sadly, almost none do. And that’s the problem.

                                          I don’t mind ads. I mind remote execution of untrusted code on my machine, that spies on me and tracks me.

                                          1. 1

                                            I don’t want remote execution of untrusted code on my machine either that spies and/or tracks me. However, that has nothing/little to do with making the Internet less bloated, which is what I was originally discussing in terms of wins/loss.

                                            1. 1

                                              Um, not sending 30MB of client-side executable scripts has everything to do with a bloated internet.

                                              1. 2

                                                By remote execution I thought you were referring to remote code execution the security vulnerability, not JavaScript as a whole.

                                                In any case, my argument is that if people stopped transpiling / browserifying client-side projects and just wrote what was needed we wouldn’t be pushing down megabytes of JavaScript down the pipeline, and if this was done it’d be a win for the Internet as it’d be faster / less bloated.

                                                1. 2

                                                  Now everything you wrote here, I can agree with :)

                          2. 1

                            people get paid to do something “that works” as fast and as cheap as possible, not “something that works well”

                            1. 1

                              This is not always the case, some companies (mine included) work to making things that work well at the cost of being a bit more premium than the cheaper alternatives and business is still running good for us.

                        2. 1

                          I gave up on that.