tcfhgj

21 ms·

1. 661.▲
   by tcfhgj 1y ago

   > Especially in the early phase of an extension, you want to encourage experimentation with different approaches. Early selection would be disadvantageous. With any standard you can experiment what you want, nobody* even can prevent you
2. 662.▲
   by tcfhgj 1y ago

   Optional features is something different than uncoordinated extensions which might conflict with each other.
3. 663.▲
   by tcfhgj 1y ago

   My opinion: XMPP is too little like Matrix (e.g. decentralized rooms, people as verification targets, messages (incl. e2ee ones) easily synced to all sessions) while Matrix is in a sub optimal state due to the Element/Element X client
4. 664.▲
   by tcfhgj 1y ago

   Everywhere, my provider limits me to 32 kbit/s
5. 665.▲
   by tcfhgj 1y ago

   I haven't linked a runtime but the specific feature, which alleviates manual handling of multiple futures when awaiting multiple futures concurrently, expressed in the language named Rust.
6. 666.▲
   by tcfhgj 1y ago

   it's not really significantly bad: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KtotxNAwME
7. 667.▲
   by tcfhgj 1y ago

   > Throbol requires WebGPU. Try with Chrome, Edge, Safari, or Opera.
8. 668.▲
   by tcfhgj 1y ago

   never heard of that
9. 669.▲
   by tcfhgj 1y ago

   why?
10. 670.▲
    by tcfhgj 1y ago

    Just don't process any personal data by default when not I inherently required -> no banner required.
11. 671.▲
    by tcfhgj 1y ago

    no https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/future/macro.join.html
12. 672.▲
    by tcfhgj 1y ago

    But to be able to actually use just "?" you need a specific library as well. So according to your wording you go out of your way to to be able to just use "?".
13. 673.▲
    by tcfhgj 1y ago

    > The virality of async await is that once you mark a function async, then you can only call it from another async function Rust calling async function in non-async function: ... // Create the runtime let rt = Ru
14. 674.▲
    by tcfhgj 1y ago

    Iirc I had a situation a while back, in which I used async await with tokio with a non Send or Sync type and it compiled when I didn't use spawn[1] (implying multithreading) but a simple loop with sequential processing. Only when I wan
15. 675.▲
    by tcfhgj 1y ago

    Sprinkling "?" everywhere and the properties you mentioned are not really a different approach by the language but by the (some) users. I am not even sure if Rust is that more convenient in this regard generally. To actually be ab
16. 676.▲
    by tcfhgj 1y ago

    Germanys healthcare systems goes Matrix
17. 677.▲
    by tcfhgj 1y ago

    thanks, got it!
18. 678.▲
    by tcfhgj 1y ago

    > If anything, it does a great job at abstracting the usage from the implementation. This is something Rust fails at spectacularly. Could you expand on this? I don't get what you mean
19. 679.▲
    by tcfhgj 1y ago

    You can write a wrapper in other langs, too, e.g. in Rust: block_on(async_fn)
20. 680.▲
    by tcfhgj 1y ago

    > If you are using a library in rust, it has to be async await, tokio, send+sync and all the other crap Send and sync is only required if you want to access something from multiple threads, which isn't required by async await (paral
21. 681.▲
    by tcfhgj 1y ago

    I "hate" GOs error handling because of repetitive and verbose boiler plate when it comes to error handling. Rust has almost the same error handling concept, but with way less boilerplate. And Rust actually syntactically forces to
22. 682.▲
    by tcfhgj 1y ago

    The only tool I found which allows to easily spin up pre-configured VMs without any gui hassle
23. 683.▲
    by tcfhgj 1y ago

    I wish it would help, but ATM there isn't a single chat system I know which uses the EU legislation to connect to WhatsApp.
24. 684.▲
    by tcfhgj 1y ago

    1 upvote
25. 685.▲
    by tcfhgj 1y ago

    idk, diff the binaries?
26. 686.▲
    by tcfhgj 1y ago

    end-to-end encryption, specifically
27. 687.▲
    by tcfhgj 1y ago

    > hat I wouldn't say in a public setting, so I don't see a need to forgo good features for privacy. People are already too deeply invested in convincing people to use Signal and they can't easily amend this choice because
28. 688.▲
    by tcfhgj 1y ago

    would you be willing to share a backup of your msgs?
29. 689.▲
    by tcfhgj 1y ago

    should I or anyone care?
30. 690.▲
    by tcfhgj 1y ago

    The point of e2ee is already lost anyways. What does E2EE potentially give you? A promise, which does not involve trusting the service provider, that messages can only read by the recipient. What does making the app closed source take from