3 ms·

I like the idea of a textmode computing life. What is your preferred way to browse the web?

1vuio0pswjnm7 3y ago
1. Make HTTP requests with variety of software, but not graphical web browser, including shell scripts, TCP clients and custom UNIX-like programs, i.e., small, easy-to-use in pipes. 2. Use text-only browser to read HTML. I make heavy use of HTTP/1,1 pipelining so I'm not "browsing" as much as I am doing bulk HTML or JSON retrieval from a single host. This cannot be done with graphical web browser nor with curl, wget or even aria2.^1 Often I get downvoted by HTTP/2 or HTTP/3 fans on HN when I discuss this because it is not contemplated in their vision for the web, i.e., interactive websites, graphical advertising and imperceptible data collection and tracking. (For example, they will say something like, "No one else does that". Who cares.^2 I'm doing it. The way the majority of people use the web has nothing to do with how they want to use it. They made no choice between one option or another that is significantly different. They are only using the web in the way dictated to them by so-called "tech" companies and legions of hivemind web developers, all praying to the same God of Advertising. The web was not created nor designed for mandatory delivery and receipt of advertising, it was created for whatever people want it to use it for; it's quite versatile.) Sometimes I play around with nghttp2 and it just feels totally inflexible. Bad ergonomics for how I use the web. Using a browser from an advertising company shapes the way people think of the web. It limits thinking and especially thinking outside the box. Look for the replies that seek to discredit those who aberrate from use of the web as mechanism for delivery and receipt of advertising. If I preferred what was "common", then I would not be using NetBSD. And if it was as popular I suspect it would be less good. Quite confident other NetBSD users have had that thought before. Some software developers stuggle to understand why others might not care about popularity because they live their lives desperately hoping/trying to get others to use the software they write. But I'm not a software developer and I like stuff that is not popular, especially non-popular software. 1. To be truthful, with aria2 it's technically possible but not designed for use in UNIX pipes. 2. Answer: Advertisers, but certainly not me.

1. Make HTTP requests with variety of software, but not graphical web browser, including shell scripts, TCP clients and custom UNIX-like programs, i.e., small, easy-to-use in pipes. 2. Use text-only browser to read HTML. I make heavy use of HTTP/1,1 pipelining so I'm not "browsing" as much as I am doing bulk HTML or JSON retrieval from a single host. This cannot be done with graphical web browser nor with curl, wget or even aria2.^1 Often I get downvoted by HTTP/2 or HTTP/3 fans on HN when I discuss this because it is not contemplated in their vision for the web, i.e., interactive websites, graphical advertising and imperceptible data collection and tracking. (For example, they will say something like, "No one else does that". Who cares.^2 I'm doing it. The way the majority of people use the web has nothing to do with how they want to use it. They made no choice between one option or another that is significantly different. They are only using the web in the way dictated to them by so-called "tech" companies and legions of hivemind web developers, all praying to the same God of Advertising. The web was not created nor designed for mandatory delivery and receipt of advertising, it was created for whatever people want it to use it for; it's quite versatile.) Sometimes I play around with nghttp2 and it just feels totally inflexible. Bad ergonomics for how I use the web. Using a browser from an advertising company shapes the way people think of the web. It limits thinking and especially thinking outside the box. Look for the replies that seek to discredit those who aberrate from use of the web as mechanism for delivery and receipt of advertising. If I preferred what was "common", then I would not be using NetBSD. And if it was as popular I suspect it would be less good. Quite confident other NetBSD users have had that thought before. Some software developers stuggle to understand why others might not care about popularity because they live their lives desperately hoping/trying to get others to use the software they write. But I'm not a software developer and I like stuff that is not popular, especially non-popular software. 1. To be truthful, with aria2 it's technically possible but not designed for use in UNIX pipes. 2. Answer: Advertisers, but certainly not me.