3 ms·

Actually the other protocols all exist, and work fine, thanks. The major exception was high bandwidth communication, where it remains cost prohibitive to do wi

Actually the other protocols all exist, and work fine, thanks. The major exception was high bandwidth communication, where it remains cost prohibitive to do without scale - video has come a long way, to be sure, but large image, audio, video processing have remained difficult to do at scale and right, at least without the correct hardware and supporting algorithms. There are solutions, most of the ones I can think of involve paying money versus using some "free" service - this is why you don't see a lot of private fileshares with random videostreams between friends, not so much technical reasons.

jrochkind1 5y ago
vishnugupta said "popular", you replied with "works fine". While protocols may exist that "work fine", it seems clear that for "chat, video conferencing, file sharing" (as well as social media), proprietary networks are more much much more popular than standardized protocols. Email being a notable still-popular exception, when it comes to internet communications.
- deadbeeves 5y ago
  Is it really relevant that email is standardized when no one will relay your messages if you're a nobody? I can send messages from myself to myself, whoop-de-doo.
- tsujp 5y ago
  > proprietary network The statement was protocols, not networks. Not all protocols involve networks. But let's assume you did mean protocol here and not network. > it seems clear that for "chat, video conferencing, file sharing" (as well as social media), proprietary networks [protocols] are more much much more popular than standardized protocols. No that's categorically false. HTTP came into existence in 1989 and HTTP/1 was fully spec'd out in 1996. The three major protocols for emails: POP3, IMAP, and SMTP: 1988, 1988, and 1981. HTTP is used for communication and social media. So is HTTPS. Want to use an SSD for your operating system to load programs off-of for your games and communication? That requires SATA or NVMe. Want to play games that require non-trivial graphics? That requires PCIe. Want to use Discord or Zoom or Slack Huddle or your own in-browser (or "desktop" [really a browser] app variant of those)? That's WebRTC which uses TLS and SCTP. Where is the proprietary here? Where are you pulling this information from?
  - jrochkind1 5y ago
    I think we're talking about different things. I'm not sure if you know we are talking about different things are are doing it intentionally, or if we are just talking past each other. I can't say for sure what vishnugupta meant, but what I thought when I read their comment are: * Most people's chat goes over things like Slack or MS Teams -- proprietary protocols. Not the open protocols that do exist like IRC. * Most people's "instant messaging" goes over things like Signal, Whatsapp, or Facebook Messenger, all proprietary protocols. Even if open protocols like XMPP exist, they are less popular. * Most people's video conferencing goes over things like Zoom, MS Teams, Apple Facetime -- proprietary protocols. * I am not familiar with the "file sharing" protocols popular, but I assume the same. HOWEVER, most people's email goes over open protocols. It's an outlier when it comes to these higher-level interpersonal communications. (Do you disagree? I'm not sure if you do, or if you're just talking about something else!) But yes, of course, there are other open protocols that are still very much in use. Including things like TCP/IP and UDP (which almost all of the protocols we are talking about function on top of) and HTTP (which some may as well). Most of these popular infrastructural protocols are also older, where vishnugupta suggested "since then", new protocols that become popular tend to be proprietary. An example of a newer network protocol that was open and standardized and also had a lot of uptake would be good to hear!
    - alexb_ 5y ago
      What? Microsoft uses UDP/TCP for teams, Signal uses the open-source Signal protocol, Whatsapp uses XMPP, Facetime uses many open standards, "file sharing" all uses https (centralized) or bittorrent (decentralized). I don't think you understand what you are really talking about. Almost every single company does not take the time to develop their own protocol just to be an asshole. They are built for maximizing profit at minimal cost, and not using open standards is unnecessary cost.
      - jrochkind1 5y ago
        Did you see where I already wrote "Including things like TCP/IP and UDP (which almost all of the protocols we are talking about function on top of)"? So I'm not sure what you are disagreeing with or not understanding to say "what?". You are proposing an explanation for why most of these things run on proprietary protocols, an explanation I agree is a component of what's going on, I didn't say anythign to the contrary -- I'm still stuck on trying to demonstrate that proprietary protocols for these things are more popular than open standard ones -- which is being disputed -- before we can even get to talking about what explains this state of affairs!

jrochkind1 5y ago

vishnugupta said "popular", you replied with "works fine". While protocols may exist that "work fine", it seems clear that for "chat, video conferencing, file sharing" (as well as social media), proprietary networks are more much much more popular than standardized protocols. Email being a notable still-popular exception, when it comes to internet communications.

deadbeeves 5y ago
Is it really relevant that email is standardized when no one will relay your messages if you're a nobody? I can send messages from myself to myself, whoop-de-doo.
tsujp 5y ago
> proprietary network The statement was protocols, not networks. Not all protocols involve networks. But let's assume you did mean protocol here and not network. > it seems clear that for "chat, video conferencing, file sharing" (as well as social media), proprietary networks [protocols] are more much much more popular than standardized protocols. No that's categorically false. HTTP came into existence in 1989 and HTTP/1 was fully spec'd out in 1996. The three major protocols for emails: POP3, IMAP, and SMTP: 1988, 1988, and 1981. HTTP is used for communication and social media. So is HTTPS. Want to use an SSD for your operating system to load programs off-of for your games and communication? That requires SATA or NVMe. Want to play games that require non-trivial graphics? That requires PCIe. Want to use Discord or Zoom or Slack Huddle or your own in-browser (or "desktop" [really a browser] app variant of those)? That's WebRTC which uses TLS and SCTP. Where is the proprietary here? Where are you pulling this information from?
- jrochkind1 5y ago
  I think we're talking about different things. I'm not sure if you know we are talking about different things are are doing it intentionally, or if we are just talking past each other. I can't say for sure what vishnugupta meant, but what I thought when I read their comment are: * Most people's chat goes over things like Slack or MS Teams -- proprietary protocols. Not the open protocols that do exist like IRC. * Most people's "instant messaging" goes over things like Signal, Whatsapp, or Facebook Messenger, all proprietary protocols. Even if open protocols like XMPP exist, they are less popular. * Most people's video conferencing goes over things like Zoom, MS Teams, Apple Facetime -- proprietary protocols. * I am not familiar with the "file sharing" protocols popular, but I assume the same. HOWEVER, most people's email goes over open protocols. It's an outlier when it comes to these higher-level interpersonal communications. (Do you disagree? I'm not sure if you do, or if you're just talking about something else!) But yes, of course, there are other open protocols that are still very much in use. Including things like TCP/IP and UDP (which almost all of the protocols we are talking about function on top of) and HTTP (which some may as well). Most of these popular infrastructural protocols are also older, where vishnugupta suggested "since then", new protocols that become popular tend to be proprietary. An example of a newer network protocol that was open and standardized and also had a lot of uptake would be good to hear!
  - alexb_ 5y ago
    What? Microsoft uses UDP/TCP for teams, Signal uses the open-source Signal protocol, Whatsapp uses XMPP, Facetime uses many open standards, "file sharing" all uses https (centralized) or bittorrent (decentralized). I don't think you understand what you are really talking about. Almost every single company does not take the time to develop their own protocol just to be an asshole. They are built for maximizing profit at minimal cost, and not using open standards is unnecessary cost.
    - jrochkind1 5y ago
      Did you see where I already wrote "Including things like TCP/IP and UDP (which almost all of the protocols we are talking about function on top of)"? So I'm not sure what you are disagreeing with or not understanding to say "what?". You are proposing an explanation for why most of these things run on proprietary protocols, an explanation I agree is a component of what's going on, I didn't say anythign to the contrary -- I'm still stuck on trying to demonstrate that proprietary protocols for these things are more popular than open standard ones -- which is being disputed -- before we can even get to talking about what explains this state of affairs!