I worked on something in this space[1], using a heavily modified Chrome browser years ago, but I consider I was too early and I bet something in this lines (probably simpler) will take off when the time is right.
Unfortunately I got a little of a burnout for working some years on it, but I confess I have a more optimized and more to the point version of this. Also having to work on Chrome for this with all its complexity is a bit too much.
So even though is a lot of work, nowadays I think is better to start from scratch and implement the features slowly.
Watching pre-code hollywood you can see how the movies from the US from that era were not far away from the european movies in terms of brightness.
Once i knew about this i understood why most of the hollywood movies turned out into the brain damages in comparison to the european cinema.. this together with plot based movies + capitalistic objectives being considered above artistic values and originality, turned things worse.
The only reason some US movies have artistic values is or because the film-makers are defiant of the system, rule-breakers, managing to bend the system into their favor or the money-making machine captivated some talented foreign film-makers.. But of course giving the system keep draining and eating itself, its never enough, and there are no roots nor a organic and sustainable growth.
But the system works in a sort of vampiresque form, so once there are no more talent to suck, or the talents are not "selling out" anymore, all the system goes down with time..
I love to watch the cultural and cinema areas because there are a lot of lessons to learn from the perspective of technology, because our fields are not that much different once you see the patterns..
I always tough that the US capitalism need some sort of balance to not always become imbalanced because its giving too much focus on profits.
Technology companies that were once inventive turn into to "give more profits to the shareholder" machines and eventually lose what actually gave them the edge anyway. Apple for instance didn't learn its lesson and its repeating the same errors of the past unfortunately..
I know it was about "pre-code" and "what it have to do with it?" right? But i focus on this to learn about how technology can blossom and other controversial things like "what the nazis did right" (*) in terms of technology to understand more about this..
(*) - My current answer to this is that the nazi were there just in time to collect all the science that have been promoted since the XIX century. So basically the nazis were there to collect and use all that scientific prowess to forge their war machine (of course they were also masters at giving people meaning and big goals/dream big).
France’s film industry is a counterpoint. While there are some good films, they are the exception. A lot of real crap gets made in France because they don’t answer to the box office. (I really love the French New Wave, so I’m not a French film hater — but there is a lot of garbage that gets made because of how films get funded and exhibited — i.e. nationalistic film quotas.) The UK on the other hand has some pretty cool films — it seems to be a hybrid of the American privately funded system with some non-profit support.
The Korean film industry is “capitalistic” and they are putting out some really great stuff; though Korean “dramas” are the East-Asian version of novellas — I can live without that. But the people seem to like it.
I like your comment because it really make the root point here more evident..
Different strategies with different outcomes, it's hard to compare anything against the US which is an outlier, but there are some connections between tech and the cultural industry (especially movies).
And also as your point make more evident, of course that making the movie industry more sustainable and able to attract attention somehow is wanted. But giving there are people that like to eat more sushi than pizza, and giving the movie industry can shape itself while shaping its customers at the same time, i wonder if there's not a good way to mixing both (i mean hollywood could have been more bold in that regards instead of focusing too much in shaping its "milking cow")..
Anyway art is against "useful" or at least should have such a freedom that it doesn't even need to abide to useful.. Movies are a wonderful medium exactly because it's on this thin line between be art and something "useful" somehow..
making it a very sophisticated art form. (James Cameron comes to mind in mixing well both worlds, but guys like Denis Villeneuve are the ones that mix it really well in my point of view, bringing more sophistication to the table of popularity)
Somehow technology in general falls into those same traps. It must be sustainable, but to keep moving forward it also needs not to kill creativity. That's why i've mixed "maximizing the shareholder profit" into the equation to show how despite the fact that capital was paramount for the success of the endeavor in the first place, it can also be the source of its ruin when it makes the endeavors to lost what made them successful in the first place because they are focusing too much in just one vector (it actually kind of works great for industrial endeavors, but its not hard to see that more sophisticated industries like software and cinema, it doesn't live to it's full potential).
One of the reasons films are popular is by reinforcing a pavlovian behavior, where the movie industry learn what people like to see and give them that in return in a formulaic manner.
It works like a self-fulfilling prophecy, so once the formula of the popular of a given period is found, movies are made repeating those patterns to attract paying costumers (movies are one of the only industries who can mold their customers to become their customers).
Particularly i don't think popular convey into best, sometimes i'ts not even good, its just a Pavlov dog expecting to be entertained. So answering your question if people watch movies to be entertained, yes that industry works, as the profits show. But i disagree this industry create good movies as in the form movies were meant to be.
I don't mind formulaic movies, i don't judge people that want to be entertained as i was one of them and i still am from time to time, but once you dig down in the the cinema rabbit hole your sense of good changes quite a lot.. its like once you learn to taste more fancy food, with a myriad of tastes and colors a macdonald's does not taste the same. Or getting back to program in C after learn to program in D :)
Best as in movies for entertainment purposes, yes. Best as in sophisticated movies, i dont think it's the best system. I don't know what would that be.. and i bet it probably would need to be a "capitalism 2.0" that mixed with other things, but the system is kind of broken and until we really fix this we will need to live with economical crisis from 10 to 10 years..
FreeBSD have a lower memory footprint and their network (now together with their filesystem) make it a better server than Linux if you want a better use of your network bandwidth.
I love FreeBSD and would prefer to use it as my desktop instead of Linux, but for servers people should also consider FreeBSD as a great option for a better use of computational resources. (And all this even when Linux have zillions of smart people working hours and hours to optimized it which FreeBSD cannot afford to)
I was also looking into BSDs (FreeBSD and OpenBSD) as an alternative to Linux, but almost every package that I need is available for the top 3 OSs (Win, macOS, Linux) only.
For example, I didn't see vscode for BSD. And I'm worried that maintaining a BSD would be more of a hassle than even Arch Linux.
Whether it's been added to the binary package build farm or you'll have to build the port yourself I don't know though, but poudriere makes (re-)building ports a pretty pleasant experience.
BSD often does start off feeling like a hassle, but the docs are excellent and once you get a feel for it then it doesn't honestly feel like more work than linux. Note: I run a mixture of FreeBSD and Debian on my personal systems and find them both pretty painless, but I do tend to value "do exactly what I told you to" when it comes to recreational sysadminry so bear that preference in mind when interpreting my thoughts.
Back in the day I used run the Linux version of Return to Castle Wolfenstein under FreeBSD (with NVidia drivers), and it ran as fast or faster (per FPS counts).
It used to be that if you were going to run BSD that meant either compiling from ports or source. Packages were only available for the most common components, but the default was ports and most admins went along with that because you got greater flexibility/opportunities to optimize. Back then source compiles of software like Apache were the norm for even the Solaris boxes I worked on. Same for most perl modules (I had a decade-long war with Math::Pari).
Now that you are saying this.. take a look everywhere, it's all like this.. every country turned into the worst versions of themselves, but even the worst of UK its kind of not bad in my opinion, compared to other countries.
At least from an outside view, it's the UK now that is showing a good leadership in the current worldwide crises. While the US, France and Germany are completely lost, especially on how to deal with a "strong-man".
(Meanwhile nobody remembers Cameron or that guy that was a pure puppet of the US in the forced Iraq war, and they were the posh gentleman everyone was expecting)
Your example is quite funny and also represents how i would approach the matter of becoming a linux kernel developer.
Even if C is not my primary language of choice, i would definitely try adapt myself to the ecosystem and not the other way around.
You have all the knowledge of other peers, manual, books, all the libraries, the whole ecosystem.. this cant be replaced.
Also there's something else about C nowadays, is the lingua-franca, the latim (or english) of programming languages. We use it to expose api's to others in any other language that want to consume it as a library.
There's something about culture that people often forget in tech.. it's the real backbone of any project that it's on its own feet.. and when you want to enter in a community you will be better of if you learn and adapt yourself into this community culture instead of creating cultural clashes into the community and try to overtake it (be it hostile or not).
People should be aware that this effort will make it possible to create rust-based kernel drivers and that's it. the RIIR folks are delusional and hype fueled and its better if the sane Rust community get away from them or start to get them back into reality as i bet they are not willing to expend 10 or 15 years of their lives rewriting big and complex piece of software for a likely no return as people will tend to keep using the software the have more community and that are stronger.
It's a much better approach for Rust or any other programming language to become research darlings and eventually become the primary ecosystem of a research OS that went well and is the thing that will replace Linux. The language alone wont do it, it must be able to be a contender to UNIX and POSIX, and whatever language that is in such a system will probably be the one that will become the dominant one in such a ecosystem.
Also another good approach is to virtualize the Linux Api like gvisor does is userspace or the fuchsia OS(and even FreeBSD) does in the kernelspace. So that you can create your OS and kernel in the best way you can looking ahead, and have this Linux compat layer where applications dont even need to be aware they are not actually running in Linux.
Yes, i'm sure there's an imaginary opponent downvoting my comment.
Also there's a lot into my comment, and people are not even noticing it in the whole context.
If there's no reason, why people get so upset? just move on if you are not being mentioned, as it will clearly be the case if i'm talking about "imaginary opponents"..
> The one proposing it is a long-time kernel contributor.
I'm not saying anything about people working on it specifically, if you read my comment, there's a clear separation between serious people and the hype crowd (which is not just RIIR, but now also cryptocurrency fellows, etc).. i can't say where the people working on this fits, i don't know them. Don't know from which part of my comment you took that conclusion.
There are quiet, clever, serious people doing the work, like Hoare, Matsakis and the people that are real enginners, i have all the respect for them (and im pretty sure Rust have tons of such a people). To be fair, all languages have all kinds of people but i don't know what happen to some of them that tend to attract a certain type of people more than others, like the feeling a got from Haskell community more often than others (but given the community was much smaller)..
For instance talking about culture, C succeeded exactly because it was a pragmatic language very simple and efficient like their founders to get things done. With this culture, things happened to be done around the language and we have the ecosystem we have today.. it's a great hacker spirit of more humble, hard-working, behind-the-cameras sort of people which i sincerely miss in the days of instagram, tick-tock and tech celebritism.
Anyone who believes that Rust will quickly replace C in the kernel clearly knows very little about Rust or the kernel, and definitely should not be taken as a spokesperson for either.
I suspect that this "RIIR" that you seem to believe is some kind of "movement" is just a random assortment of clueless people posting in random places.
A ruling clique spreads quasi-religious beliefs that boil down to "we're the future!" to prospective followers. The ones who join up, are inspired and push ever intensified (yet even more honest) versions of those beliefs onto others "we must get rid the old thing". In one or two cycles of evolution, their evangelism provokes hostility from the unconverted. Unwilling to confront their own motivations, the rulers ignore how the spirit of their beliefs implicitly sanctioned their adherents misbehavior "technically, no one said they want to destroy the old thing".
A simple pattern that rulers to turn a blind eye to the connection between belief and action.
Ugh yeah, now that you point it out, there was one. To be sure, my internal reaction to that comment was "oh, a troll or a loonie", but maybe they were serious, which is kinda worrying.
i was born in a city near a german colony in the south of Brazil where a lot of germans from the 20's, 30's and later 40's arrived (which is unusual giving german colonies in Brazil are mostly from people of the late 1800's).
Anyway my father swore that he saw "an old man that looked a lot like Hitler without the mustache" in the 80's in that colony.
And its funny because its like those stories about people that have seen alien ships, you know is very unlikely but you never stop to wonder, "what if..". Well now there's no doubt that it was just a Hitler lookalike (poor man).
Also, one thing that always looked of in those theories is the fact that a man with the psychology of Hitler would be able to live a very simple life with such big regrets and
big dreams smashed, seeing how much he was hated (remember, he was a narcissist) til old age. It always seemed unlikely to me, "not like hitler", while the suicide seems much more believable.
I guess its all coming down to mnemonics, aiding our memories and communicating.
Sure this is the "state of the art", but despite the fact that pure language notations might be even worse, i cant help to think that people thinking like the parent might find something even better.
Maybe something inspired by braille notation or something that is invented while trying to understand how our brain works (just speculating here) will be even more expressive.
I actually like seeing an adult be bothered by the fact that the same symbols that turn science more expressive are also the reason that there's a big ladder for newcomers to understand whats being expressed given its all very arbitrary (someone in
the XVI century choose a random greek letter to represent X).
Imagine how much science would improve with more "brain power" being also able to try to solve some problems given there are less arbitrarity..
Sure, it's good to have more options but, the deploy base of browsers like Chrome are massive and IE6 only lost its position by being careless and stop evolving (and lets not forget it took years), which is something that is not happening with Chrome.
Just to make clear, this is not specifically directed to you or your project, which is a great thing to do independently of the outcome. I'm saying this more as in a general perspective as we are pretty much sitted on the state-of-the-art of browser engines and its hard to see something else taking over except for a "game reset" scenario (outside of the web).
The point is that a lot of sites out there don't need anything more than the web tech of 2 decades ago. With more people being aware of that and using browsers like this, the Google monopoly may weaken. I make it a point to complain whenever some site I need to use changes in the direction of Google's desires and becomes less browser-agnostic. It has had mixed results, but I suspect if a company is losing customers because its web devs are Google-loving trendchasers, they'll take notice.
> The point is that a lot of sites out there don't need anything more than the web tech of 2 decades ago. With more people being aware of that and using browsers like this, the Google monopoly may weaken.
I always thought this was a way to get out of this, that agrees with your vision. First you'll need a powerful force to take back control on defining web standards.
This new web standard would be a very simplistic one, making possible for two or three (or even one) people to create new browsers on top of it.
But this movement would need to be so strong, that it would be possible to make a dent and start to lead a new way. And this is the one of the most hardest part. People on this movement would need to be prepared to fight for at least 10 years without loosing its faith until the killer app of this movement should be able to be at a market share bigger than Safari and taking over the Firefox position.
This movement could use the hype akin to Rust folks to navigate the harder first years. Its a possibility but it's hard to become possible. Another thing to notice is that the Firefox position is getting weaker, but the most probable candidate to take over is the chrome-based Brave.
So unless a "black-swan" event happen it's hard to see a big change into this in the coming years. BTW it's even more likely that the browser standards get stronger by completely taking over the mobile applications..
I think Gemini will have people following it and developing for it, but i think it could have been a little more ambitious and also took tech history a little bit more serious as to not take too much out of what is actually a improvement done on the web that could be a soft fork of the current web with a lot less things, but not as simplistic as Gemini is.
So i don't think Gemini is "it" yet, but at least i liked the audacity and the way of thinking, its on the right direction and actually it should be people like Tim-berners-lee that should actually be leading this, but unfortunately they are lost..
I think browsers are comparable to operating systems, and if we look at the richness of the Linux ecosystem, I'd say it can't hurt to have a few more browsers and browser engines. For example, most users wouldn't see the utility of Arch linux. And yet Arch linux is the backbone of Docker. Perhaps a new browser engine can fill a similar niche, targeting low resource usage and light browsing
I've have a answer to this same thread specifying something i'm working on, so in case you are curious, you can have more info by reading the details i gave in the other answer, and the way to solve this problem is through indirection.
You don't expose your data layer directly to the consumer, you expose an api that will resolve to one, two or several databases from one or many peers. The indirection allow you to define your rules and use your data layer in a way that fits your application goals in the best way possible.
So whats is immutable is your application, api and initial data, which you can mutate at later stages through other torrents or by consuming other api's from other peers and mutating your initial database state.
The problem is, the current browser is not meant for this, Javascript is not meant for bigger and complex applications (of course you can do it, but..)
I've built something akin to this, but with the idea of applications distributing API`s where the databases are also torrented but working behind the api's, so that developers can build basically anything.
In my case i've implemented a new "browser" based on Chrome that allows this to work, without having to resort to browser-only infrastructure (for instance applications can dodge Javascript and also call RPC api's from other applications directly).
The applications and the applications data are distributed over torrent and managed to work together in the same environment as a flock where one app can consume its own apis and also the api's from others.
service Search {
rpc doQuery(string query) => (array<string> result) // the access to the sqlite db from torrents is encapsulated here
}
The beauty of this design is that it can also be re-scheduled and have the same request routed to other peers
Unfortunately I got a little of a burnout for working some years on it, but I confess I have a more optimized and more to the point version of this. Also having to work on Chrome for this with all its complexity is a bit too much.
So even though is a lot of work, nowadays I think is better to start from scratch and implement the features slowly.
1 - https://github.com/mumba-org/mumba