If I had a nickel for every time someone ignored me just to say something I directly address…

You are pretty blatantly referencing X11 Forwarding / Network Transparency.

I can’t reasonably assume you actually read anything I say, but to briefly reiterate:

Checkout Waypipe. Here’s a direct quote from the README:

Waypipe is a proxy for Wayland clients. It forwards Wayland messages and serializes changes to shared memory buffers over a single socket. This makes application forwarding similar to ssh -X feasible.

Have you tried this? What is disatisfactory about it? And if all else fails, is there really ANY problem with simply using VNC/etc? What real-world problem do you have that is uniquely solved with this?

What? I’ve gotten RDP, VNC, and SPICE working fine on Wayland. And if you need app-level displays then waypipe worked fine the last time I used it. I’ve been running Proxmox containers with Wayland just fine, too.

Any particular use case that benefits from what Xorg was uniquely capable of networking-wise (network transparency, afaik?) of is quite niche and development effort twoards that end has always reflected that!

I’ve not been able to find the git or project repo/writeup of “Wayland on Wires”. Though i do vaguely feel like I saw it somewhere.

But I suppose me and my ongoing computer science degree and shared family hobby of IT simply hasn’t reached Real Linux User levels yet. I must sharpen my Bash Blade for another 1000 years…

Since that’s the case, I suppose I must defer to your Infinitely Endless Wisdom as a True Linux User. I beg of thee, answer my Most Piteous Questions…:

1. What do you use Xorg’s networking functionality for?
2. What is ““real”” Linux work?
3. Why can’t you use Wayland for that?
4. Have you heard of Waypipe? Have you used it?

“Linux as a desktop is BAD!”

“Evidence?”

“I failed to make a slideshow in a buggy application. :'(”

In all seriousness, though, wtf? You could have pulled from any of the well-know papercuts and instead you balk about a broken application? Lmao?

My vibeo gaem crashed on Windows once. I guess I should hold Microsoft personally accountable for it…

For the record, I’ve used Linux throughout Highschool, Community College, and College. No issues with basic software functionality, really.

The worst and only issue I’ve had in that regard is self-inflicted because I decided to run LibreOffice via Wayland, which has an ongoing bug that makes scrolling laggy. That’s it.

The larger issues with Linux as a desktop is software compat (Wine) with Windows for nicher use cases (requires debugging and a bunch of setup), certain drivers (cough cough Nvidia cough cough), and general dumbass-proofing.

Can we just let this shit die already? If you’re unsatisfied with Wayland make extensions to the protocol or make a new one.

Why in the fuck are so many people obssessed over a piece of software that contains an entire networking stack and has a security model so bad that it lets literally every application keylog you constantly?

It is self-evident that free software with open licensing and no strings attached is a superior and more beneficial ownership model than closed source paid licensing. That part I don’t think anyone needs to be convinced of.

As someone who has both technical and nontechnical people in their family, I call bs. Even if it is partially self-evident (in the fact that you dont need to sign into an account or pay for it), the details, and more importantly the weight, of FOSS is often lost on people.

I’ve had to watch some of them walk into a rake and bruise their foreheads several times over before really absorbing it.

It’s something people need to really read up on before true comprehension. That, or get burnt really really badly.

Ideology? Politics? Tomato tomatoh in my eyes. At the very least, they’re nearly inseperable (think: DMCA, copyright law, etc.)

Go is a simpler-to-read language that does not involve lifetimes (as you know, it is GC’d). For a lot of smaller projects like this, the boringness of Go is preferred. Less mental bandwidth required.

I’ll admit my definition of “industrial” here was vague, but I think you can get my point. I’m not trying to say that Rust isn’t good in a business setting - my job also has Rust in the code!

However, for these purposes, most of the benefits of Rust in this situation are already provided by Go.

On the one hand, I love Rust, love seeing Rust winning, on the other hand: the cynical part of me observes this as a way for them to say it’s safer to use, somehow. In the sense that people fling Rust around in a kind of showey way.

Already we’ve been seeing projects fuck up with isolation irt MCP servers, so this is the backdrop to observe this kind of change.

I know this is blasphemy, but why not Go? Why Rust? I love writing Rust CLIs, but somehow I feel the personal arguments I make for such things don’t really hold up in industrial settings like this (in particular, a small open-source CLI project that interacts with networking).

There’s nothing wrong with using Rust here (Rust is great for business logic!), but the choice here almost makes me suspicious of the motivations.

Also there’s existing Rust solutions in this area! Namely: https://github.com/sigoden/aichat

I don’t really enjoy using AI when coding, but aspirationally, I’d rather support other projects than OpenAI, who is only a nonprofit in concept and is actively attempting to become a for-profit, whilst behaving like a VC funded startup.

(Not to mention the fact that mainline models are explicitly developed with the intention of destroying labor, in general)

My feelings exactly, stated a lot better than I could have managed.

God I love this publication to death. I’ve actually bought some of the ebook compendiums.

I was merely pointing out that these opinions, whatever they really are, have more publicity from people criticizing the founder.

Why yes, friend, I will just conveniently pretend that you bringing that up is completely outside the context of whether or not to seriously consider the criticism.

And if you are trying to make a point of whether or not the ideology is seriously impacting the project, you need-only take a casual walk through the issue list, and find (among other evidence) that a suggestion to move to codeberg was criticized for… “DEI”. Wow. How technically-focused.

The best from your point of view would be not to speak about it.

You are getting more and more incoherent the more of these replies you churn out. What, precisely from my point of view (which I guess apparently you know very well? the irony…) here implies that “not talking about it” is the best choice? That’s absurd.

I find it very important to understand the motivations, technical and ideological, behind a project.

If it were true, all this hatred against the project would be pointless.

I don’t spend any effort talking about in any other respect than telling people that they should likely disregard if for both technical reasons (it cuts out Xwayland, his commits frequently lead to very blatant regressions that are nontrivial, etc.) and ideological (his terrible, awful politics and motivations for making the project, to begin with!)

The reason I replied to your comment is mostly out of idle curiosity and a deepseated longing for genuineness and critical thinking of other people that I have not yet managed to kill (despite its impracticality in the modern age).

Free software is all about freedom, and diversity means freedom of choice. If you don’t agree with that, you miss the all point.

This is all such a massive and disheartening reduction of what software freedom is. I hope that you eventually manage to think less shallowly about this.

Tell me, do you have any particular, material distinction you are making by making a choice between desktop protocols? The desktop protocol is a purely technical thing, and I have not heard a single peep out of you in regards to specifics.

To elaborate, in Xorg, it is a very monolithic beast. It is very convoluted in its purview and carries a lot of preset implementation of its various facets. It contains an entire networking stack for deciding how to communicate windows over a network.

It is significantly less flexible and modular than Wayland, because in Wayland basically everything of significance is decided by the compositor.

This, ironically to your point, actually gives you more choice and freedom in how things work (this is also why tiling window managers love wayland to death, it’s pretty easy to just build upon the basic wlroots implementation!). So I have to ask you, frankly, what in the fuck do you think you’re actually saying right now?

The issue, in this way, is that you only seem to care about software freedom in the sense of the abstract concept rather than the reality. You seem to think of software freedom in the sense of “I either build and install this package, or I build and install this one”, with an all-consuming disregard for the technical aspects of freedom. Which is impractical, and arguably antithetical to the very process of trying to foster software freedom to begin with. As evident by literally everything to do with this situation. My lord.

Predictable AF, unfortunately

I really have no idea why everyone is bashing Signal so much here. None of the concerns listed seem even slightly technical.

The only problem I have with signal is that it is:

A. Centralized (which isn’t explicitly a privacy concern, but a control concern in-line with linux and foss)

B. Requires a phone number to register.

It is quite private in spite of that, and goes to great lengths to achieve that privacy. It is what I see people in the security community consistently suggest.

However, if this is a public group, are we to really be that concerned about many of the considerations Signal tries to tackle? Worst case scenario a bad actor simply enters the chat and backs everything up.

It seems like our threat model is moreso in the way of general surveillance economy concerns (and perhaps to have a slightly less public entry).

In this case, point A and B become even more glaring! Why not something like an E2E encrypted Matrix chat?

A really shitty one. (As in, completely removes Xwayland, and results in obvious regressions.)

This isn’t coherent, and even if it was, the burden of stance interpretability is context-dependent.

He is the one with the politically charged README that reads plainly like the thoughtless garbage MAGA types in America put out. I mean cmon man, “[…] we’ll make X great again”?

Also your shallow and brainless dismissal of all this criticism coming from his “detractors” (and who would not become a “detractor”, after actually investigating his terrible dribble?) is defeated easily by just reading the actual words he said.

As in, for instance, the original source of his garbage antivax posturing that he posted in the linux kernel mailing list: https://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/2106.1/04542.html .

These are not alleged opinions, he’s just full of shit.

And this isn’t even mentioning the fact that Xorg is going to be dead, should be dead, and will continue to die. And good riddance, too! Terrible and borderline unmaintainable.

The argument that choice diversity is good inherently is stupid, too. Wayland is a god damned protocol! There is no reason to have lots of diversity there! It has no tangible benefit.

There are already many different compositors that implement the Wayland protocol, and there are also many 3rd party extensions! Can you think of a single, material benefit to simply having different basic desktop protocols?