3 ms·
>In summary: Why not invent a new protocol Pretty sure I said nowhere that we shouldn't invent new and better protocols. QUIte the contrary (pardon the pun).
by usrbinbash 5y ago
>In summary: Why not invent a new protocol
Pretty sure I said nowhere that we shouldn't invent new and better protocols. QUIte the contrary (pardon the pun).
What I am saying is: We should not need to rely on new protocols to make up for the fact that we send more and more garbage, we should send less garbage.
If we can get less garbage, and new and improved protocols, all the better!
But if all we do is invent better protocols, the result will be that what buries the internet in garbage now, will use that better protocol to bury us in even more garbage.
- ReactiveJelly 5y ago"rely" is doing a lot of lifting in that sentence. It's more productive to talk about improvements. You're saying it's good to make sites smaller, and I agree. You're saying QUIC is good, and I agree. What do you want? To just complain that bad sites exist? Is this "what-aboutism" for programmers? I'm sorry, usrbinbash. I'm sorry that bad things happen, and I wish I could make you happy.
- Dylan16807 5y ago> What do you want? How about for people to recognize that this performance gift is easily squandered, and talk about how we're going to prevent bloat so that we can preserve the good performance.