3 ms·

> embrace, extend, and extinguish is alive and well ??? you can clone Github projects and move them on every other git repository you want if Github removed

> embrace, extend, and extinguish is alive and well ??? you can clone Github projects and move them on every other git repository you want if Github removed the support for git, Github would be dead in a week. Not only because git is literally in their name, but because every programmer tool that deals with code (editors, IDEs, etc.) has embedded support for git, the protocol, not git the Github version of the protocol. Remove interoperability and you killed the golden goose. At MS are not that stupid.

kragen 4y ago
if www browsers had removed support for ftp, browsers would have been dead in a week, in 01998 but because they waited until last year, removing that interoperability did not significantly affect their dominance as a way of accessing the internet
- peoplefromibiza 4y ago
  > but because they waited until last year FTP died long ago as a protocol, it wasn't killed by some corporations trying to embrace and extend, but by better protocols (SFTP, SCP, HTTP(S) etc.) also FTP created a lot of issues behind NAT
  - kragen 4y ago
    there are still ftp servers and there is still a substantial information that is only accessible through ftp, however lame the protocol design is wrt nat i would say that nat created a lot of issues with ftp
    - peoplefromibiza 4y ago
      > wrt nat i would say that nat created a lot of issues with ftp let me rephrase it. FTP behind NAT had a lot of issues. But the protocol was never designed to be accessed by a WEB browser, that were limited to read only access. The best way to access FTP is through an FTP client. I don't necessarily agree with the new wave of browser security at all costs, like HTTPS everywhere, but FTP clients are far from being hard to find. > there is still a substantial information that is only accessible through ftp can you point me to an example? I haven't encountered that problem since the end of the 90s. The only instance I can recall is upgrading the firmware of home routers/modems using TFTP.

kragen 4y ago

if www browsers had removed support for ftp, browsers would have been dead in a week, in 01998 but because they waited until last year, removing that interoperability did not significantly affect their dominance as a way of accessing the internet

peoplefromibiza 4y ago
> but because they waited until last year FTP died long ago as a protocol, it wasn't killed by some corporations trying to embrace and extend, but by better protocols (SFTP, SCP, HTTP(S) etc.) also FTP created a lot of issues behind NAT
- kragen 4y ago
  there are still ftp servers and there is still a substantial information that is only accessible through ftp, however lame the protocol design is wrt nat i would say that nat created a lot of issues with ftp
  - peoplefromibiza 4y ago
    > wrt nat i would say that nat created a lot of issues with ftp let me rephrase it. FTP behind NAT had a lot of issues. But the protocol was never designed to be accessed by a WEB browser, that were limited to read only access. The best way to access FTP is through an FTP client. I don't necessarily agree with the new wave of browser security at all costs, like HTTPS everywhere, but FTP clients are far from being hard to find. > there is still a substantial information that is only accessible through ftp can you point me to an example? I haven't encountered that problem since the end of the 90s. The only instance I can recall is upgrading the firmware of home routers/modems using TFTP.