There's just no substitute for the classics! Never mind all these
newfangled protocols. Ream Men(TM) chat via cuneiform tablets transported
by carrier pigeons.
Of course, carrier pigeons cannot compete with the airspeed velocity of an
unladen swallow...
On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 1:06 PM, Dan
On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 12:46:49PM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
> On Thu, 19 May 2016 09:19:54 -0400
> john saylor wrote:
>
> > /join
> >
> > On 05/18/16 20:43, Greg Rundlett (freephile) wrote:
> > > It's remarkable that IRC still exists after all these years.
> >
> > plain
On Thu, 19 May 2016 09:19:54 -0400
john saylor wrote:
> /join
>
> On 05/18/16 20:43, Greg Rundlett (freephile) wrote:
> > It's remarkable that IRC still exists after all these years.
>
> plain text chat still allows humans to communicate effectively with
> each other. and
/join
On 05/18/16 20:43, Greg Rundlett (freephile) wrote:
It's remarkable that IRC still exists after all these years.
plain text chat still allows humans to communicate effectively with each
other. and also the minimal display capability required of clients
[plain text] makes it very
For me the most important feature of chat is encryption. I have used:
* For texting, Silence formerly SMSSecure formerly TextSecure -- but
everyone is using Signal these days (because it is highly promoted?), so
I'm gonna probably move on to that once I get the chance to sit down and
work on
It's remarkable that IRC still exists after all these years. Mostly
because it's free as in freedom. It has it's limitations to be sure, and
quite a while ago I thought there were things like Jabber/XMPP that would
take over because of the capabilities of the protocols [1] were maturing at
the