I wonder when contemporary developers will (re)invent Emacs/Gnus: the unified inbox for email, feeds, and news, because what really matters are text messages + eventual multimedia content, personal and private scoring to manage them, and a consistent local UI that allows for personal archiving and resharing.
I've looked at the Fediverse, objectively with little hope and many design issues, I'm watching Nostr with interest even though it seems more like a rough sketch lacking the ideas to move forward, but that concept of Gnus and Usenet, so simple in itself, still hasn't managed to resurface.
- offpunk is an offline content browser/reader. Main component is fetching/caching/displaying ressources
- offpunk is developed as a set of components that can be used separately (openk, ansicat, netcache)
- offpunk delegates as much as possible to other UNIX tools (less for browsing/reading, chafa for images, grep to find in a page, $EDITOR for editing needs )
- offpunk is pure CLI tool. You type commands, results is displayed in your terminal or in less. There’s no "keyboard shortcuts" or "environment". It is a prompt on which you type commands
- There’s no "configuration" in offpunk. The only (but powerful) way on configuring is having offpunk launch commands at starts (commands listed in offpunkrc). So no "configuration language" or syntax or plugins or whatever.
- last but not least: basic use of Offpunk is simple. You are not required to learn much and you use only what you want. Lot of Offpunks users don’t use the Web/HTTP part and use it as a straight Gemini browser (for the record, Offpunk is a fork of AV-98, the very first Gemini browser)
My intention wasn't to compare software but rather paradigms; Gnus is only relevant here because it unifies email, feeds and news into a single UI. In other words, the human user sees everything as generic "posts" an approach not unlike many Nostr clients, to name something modern. It's the paradigm of saying "in the end, what matters is the message". As long as there's a readable amount of them, you don't need anything else; when they reach a certain volume, well, you need to be able to "filter" them somehow so that some are never seen/read, for others you only see the title at a glance, and some are actually read. This is the principle of scoring, which is even older, I think it was part of the first PARC Altos.
What I meant is that I wonder how long it will take nowadays to go back to creating a decentralized model or, since overhead allows for it today, a distributed one, that serves modern forms of human communication:
- blogs (e.g. Nostr's long-form notes in Habla, or WireFreely for the Fediverse)
- non-synchronous short messages (e.g. Twitter/X style)
- synchronous short messages, i.e. chat
With a decentralized/distributed network for distribution where everyone keeps what they want on their own hardware.
On the sidelines, it would be nice today to also see synchronous audio and audio+video, meaning calls and conferences, all in a single UI and with at most two or three protocols on the network side (one for asynchronous messages and media, one for chat if the asynchronous one doesn't cut it, and one for calls).
Without the end user having to make personal collages if they don't want to, using an app that is go-installable, pip-able, cargo-build-able, basically something that both those who want to try it and distro packagers can add quickly. This would help spread something among techies/nerds/geeks and also works for the end user, who would be introduced to this solution by the techies/nerds/geeks. To me, this is what's missing to see the big platforms currently in fashion get toppled.
Seeing projects like Offpunk inspired the thoughts above; that was the point :)
well, indeed. If you use mutt and use the "reply" feature in Offpunk, you will see how well emails and blog/gemini posts merge well ;-) (this will be the subject of another post later)
Gnus it's dog slow, be with email or with usenet. I say this as an ex-Emacs user where I even plugged slrn's cache in order to speed up things, but over 100k messages that was unusable in my netbook, even under 64 bit machines and native compilation. Slrn did it better. On RSS, I use sfeed which is more Unix like and I just plumb lynx/links or whatever I like as a reader. And fast, much fast than GNUs, Elfeed or the core RSS reader in Emacs.
OTOH, Emacs it's the only libre Usenet reader for Android. Go figure, and that being a dead simple protocol. Despite of that, lots of Thunderbird forks in FDroid didn't adapt the Usenet part yet.
Offpunk it's slow but adding multiprocessing with flock (for python3 maybe) would be a piece of cake in order to allow parallel downloads while syncinc.
I don't think Gnus is that bad once you spend some time setting it up. For groups with a ton of content where I mostly want to search, I found it was better to just download the whole group and index into notmuch. I could query 20 years of the Smalltalk USENET group or the Supercollider mailing list instantly.
Read again, I used slrnpull's cache. Mail was fast with Mu4e and Mairix. GNUS with slrn, not much. I have tons of articles from comp.* and some alt.* related groups. People loves to talk at comp.misc and comp.arch.
Also GNUS' caching it's really slow compared to slrn. Yes, I know, Elisp vs C, but even with native compilation it was excruciatingly slow. I've seen bytecoded TCL back in the day running really fast for these tasks.
As a long time Emacs user, I never even tried Gnus, or used it as a calendar (except for some time tracking in org-mode). How would calendar invites work there? How well does it support shared calendars to determine busy/free information of others?
That's the result of excess censorship and PRs on those platform, you can play with people more or less easily but you can't re-program them at such speed. They understand and start rejecting the narrative.
Vocal minorities vary but tend just to excite the others, not to affirm any point.
The Bitcoin genesis is certainly unclear; a FLOSS project is proudly published by those who create it and certainly don't want to remain anonymous, but the super-value of BTC over time has been driven by substantial criminal activities, not exactly US nor pro-US. The first ones were indeed US "ally", the D-Company that sold drugs for BTC to arm Al-Qaeda by selling BTC for weapons and explosives, which the sellers were happy to accept because they could sell them for various nations' fiat currencies to D-Company customers, laundering it well and without having to carry around pallets of unmarked bills, which are easy to seize during travel. Yes, Al-Qaeda was pro-US kleptocracy, certainly not pro-American people, see https://css.ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/special-interest/gess/c...
But then China also used them to smuggle Fentanyl into the US, and this late revenge against the East India companies that invaded it with opium so long ago, on the wrong subject (since it was the UK that started the Opium War and the US helped and was largely helped by China, which paid for e.g. the development of the railway networks in the US, a history forgotten by most), it proved that BTC as a tool is neutral. Its use by Venezuela, Iran, and North Korea confirms this.
So I suspend judgment, I don't trust the genesis, I read and encounter various problems https://blog.dshr.org/2025/09/the-gaslit-asset-class.html but I am not completely convinced by your analysis and honestly, I am very much in favor of the end of the banking system and the current financial model for the development of humanity, and it matters little who brings about this event; they are the enemy of my enemy in any case.
As a domestic p.v. auto-builder: the real point is seasonal storage, until we will (if we will) be able to store energy across a whole year not just day-to-day, we simply can't run on p.v. while p.v. is excellent for self consumption if only we stopped trying to create large-scale solutions instead of solutions for domestic and small sheds self-consumption, which are the only technically viable options, given that large injection power plants are nothing but a problem for the grid...
Having cars integrated with the home (since they are 400V LFP on average, just like domestic storage and CSS is already there) is what works well to reduce summer demand peaks, not by passively injecting power but by helping the grid only when it actually needs it.
The only reason it isn't being done is because the political agenda is to strip the majority of private property, and for this reason, the "new deal" that works technically doesn't work in reality. They are trying to make it work for dense cities and large buildings, some not possible on scale for an unsustainable way of life as well. When the FAKE green supporters finally realize this, they will understand how many decades of evolution we are losing just to play into the hands of a few kleptocrats.
Our cars have a total of 8x the capacity of our home batteries. We're ~ one dongle away from doing what you describe.
The other thing we need to see to really replace grids are panels that are optimized for overcast days. Currently, production drops to 0-10% when it's cloudy, even though the fraction of wattage hitting the panels is way higher than that.
At some point, I think we'll end up with panels that produce linearly to the amount of light (this is probably hard), or that are high efficiency in winter / high altitudes, but low efficiency at peak (this is probably easy).
Currently, panels are marketed on wattage under full sunlight at high temperatures. This is important for air conditioning use cases, but the grid is overproducing on those days already and we'd curtail if we took them off grid.
Same for me, I made a choice back then, and only realized it was a mistake in hindsight, to set up a small storage system, thinking it would just serve as a backup for blackouts. Since those have mostly been very short so far (a few seconds or minutes), I went with 8kWh, while the car has 74...
Today I'm expanding it, aiming for 38kWh, which is still much less than the car. Even though the price of LFP batteries has dropped significantly, it hasn't fallen enough, nor has the cost of grid power risen enough, to justify aiming for 100kWh to have substantial autonomy for most of the year, including heating.
Using the car as part of the system would be fantastic, and the technology is all there to make it happen, except for the will of manufacturers and the political drive to go in that direction. It's not happening because they don't want people to be self-sufficient; they want large power plants, not semi-autonomous homes and warehouses. But the fact is, economically and technically, the former makes no sense, while the latter does.
Is there really for the ML boom, or is it just a way to make computers more and more expensive to push people towards mobile? Because looking around, that's the effect I'm seeing, regardless of the causes.
I see a future where most people will buy tablets to save money and the desktop will be for only a few, a very few, just when self-hosting is becoming trendy and people are saying "it's time for GNU/Linux to take Windows' place"...
A small note: in 2026, classic office suites shouldn't even exist in my opinion, so if the EU were to create a glorified R/Quarto, essentially a LaTeX wrapper with some basic calculation capabilities added, it would be infinitely better than any office suite.
My personal setup is Emacs/org-mode, using babel for the rest; I use Python with Polars, Plotly, and very occasionally SymPy just to avoid using Maxima if I'm already in Python. I see no reason at all to use LibreOffice, MS Office, or anything similar. This is what's actually needed. Billions should be invested in IT training, not in copies of software from another era designed to let untrained secretarial staff use a desktop.
You use emacs so why should anyone else need MS Word? A large number of people use word processor software because it has advantages over typewriters or handwriting for their purposes rather than because they lack training in something more esoteric.
To be fair ms word is rooted in a world paper once ruled and the paper/document metaphor is becoming increasingly less relevant.
I used to use it all day every day and now i use it once a year maybe (often for government related things, coz theyre often the only ones still asking me to fill out and sign PDF forms).
Most office functions are better supplanted with a decent cms, spreadsheet, email and something to let you create forms for people to fill in.
Sometimes I really like a spreadsheet. I found out at work that spreadsheets all have map / reduce now. That's fun. If there were a spreadsheet interface that was secretly R under the hood and tricked me into understanding R that would be neat.
Spreadsheets are perhaps the only pseudo-visual programming tool to have achieved significant widespread use, but they are terrible:
- the logic is hidden; until you click on a cell, you don't know "what it actually contains"
- there is no entry point, no main(), so there is no way to read it other than keeping 100% of what the sheet does in your head, or ignoring parts of it and risking breaking them while working on others
- the logic tends to be coded in single lines rather than multi-line with proper indentation, which makes reading it very difficult
This is just the conceptual basis, without even counting the improper auto-formatting of cells that has even led to renaming genes to prevent them from being considered dates https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/6/21355674/human-genes-renam... or the absurdities regarding date calculations.
They can be convenient when you have to play around with a few pieces of tabular data, yes, but the price you pay is much higher than working with high-level languages that would be easy for even the average user to understand if only they had started with them.
The real issue is that there is no easy-to-self-host complete enough solution. We do not have something go install-able, pio-able, without a gazillion of deps web-app who offer:
- a direct call UI
- a chat UI, with optional group chats
- a simple web site to be used as a wiki-like tool to share textual stuff + common media, storage internally managed
We have anything to do all of the above, but all very complex, spread across many different projects, fragile, hyper tedious to set up etc.
EU governments don't want to learn one thing: you don't replace one dictator with another. The specific case says little, France has been developing "La Suite" for YEARS, Italy had experimented with Jitsi Meet and Big Blue Button at GARR during the COVID era, but what the EU wants is to create EU GAFAMs, whereas what we need, and not just in the EU, is FLOSS, self-hosting, desktop computing. This, however, is not welcome, starting with eIDAS 2.0 which pushes for a "super-sovereign" app-wallet for the notoriously sovereign Android and iOS instead of smart cards and USB readers that we've had for years and that various countries have used for years to log into online banking and, more recently, to sign documents.
The substantial point is that they don't want freedom, they only want to steal like others steal, to do business like others do business, instead of doing something different.
Nothing strange nor new: the average teacher is reactionary even at top universities, generally incapable of evolving, much like the stereotypical average vegetable seller.
We continue to teach children (at least in the EU) to write by hand, to do calculations manually throughout their entire schooling, when in real life, aside from the occasional scrap note, all writing is done on computers and calculations are done by machine as well. And, of course, no one teaches these latter skills.
The result on a large scale is that we have an increasingly incompetent population on average, with teaching staff competing to see who can revert the most to the past and refusing to see that the more they do this, the worse the incompetent graduates they produce.
The computer, desktop, FLOSS, is the quintessential epistemological tool of the present, just as paper was in the past. The world changes, and those who fall behind are selected out by history; come to terms with that. Not only, those who lag behind ensure that few push forward an evolution for their own interest, which typically conflicts with that of the majority.
> Nothing strange nor new: the average teacher is reactionary even at top universities, generally incapable of evolving
It feels to me like teaching has always been bandwidth constrained and providing 1:1 feedback to students have always been a bottleneck. I believe that AI agents are the true gateway to fixing that limitation and education should be embracing AI agents to increase bandwidth of 1:1 teacher student interaction.
I worry that everytime I talk to a teacher about how they're adapting to AI, it's almost as if they are trying to figure out how they can continue to use the same teaching techniques that they had seen their teachers practice decades ago.
Printed books are expensive and they should be. We already have paper equivalents that allow highlighting, rewriting, annotating, sharing notes - recyclable materials in all ways superior to paper that can be reused by multiple students - these are things we should be embracing instead of going back to one time use printed materials that are heavy to carry around, take up space in a room and will need to be disposed of soon.
If current technology is creating an issue for teachers - teachers need to pivot, not block current technology.
Society typically cares about work getting done and not much about how it got done - for some reason, teachers are so deep into the weeds of the "how", that they seem to forget that if the way to mend roads since 1926 have been to learn how to measure out, mix and lay asphalt patches by hand, in 2026 when there are robots that do that perfectly everytime, they should be teaching humans to complement those robots or do something else entirely.
> We continue to teach children (at least in the EU) to write by hand, to do calculations manually throughout their entire schooling, when in real life, aside from the occasional scrap note, all writing is done on computers and calculations are done by machine as well. And, of course, no one teaches these latter skills
Is your intuition that the EU will continue down it's path of technical irrevelance? If so, what are the top 5 reasons this is happening?
1:1 teaching is the old tutor method, still the most efficient way to transfer knowledge today, and also the least scalable. LLMs, on the other hand, are a kind of implementation of the Library of Babel or Conrad Gessner's Bibliotheca Universalis (~1545), that is, the way to "tear books apart" (here more generally any text written by humans) in order to then allow extracting only the shred of information we are looking for each time. The idea of seeing them as auto-teachers is therefore very interesting!
I imagine more of a school (not just university) where the frontal lecture has disappeared, replaced by lessons like FLOSS movies projects: the teacher writes the plot, there are narrators, visual content as needed, updated and refined over time. This implies:
- Learners go at their own pace; the brightest will finish sooner and use the time to learn other things, instead of chafing at the bit during class; the less brilliant but still capable ones can succeed with more time instead of wasting time following lectures they don't understand because they lack previous elements they can't acquire in time, lesson by lesson.
- Unfortunately, also less plurality of information, but this is compensated by the fact that the lesson is not by the assigned teacher, but by third parties, a separate FLOSS project indeed, so it is the individual teacher available 1:1 / 1:few in the time freed from frontal lectures who provides plurality.
- Sociality among students remains in a different form: one studies for oneself, tests what has been learned among peers and teachers themselves in lessons that are "presentations" by individual learners to a "class" of learners and teachers, and interaction in this setting reveals gaps and consolidates, shares, and inspires knowledge because this is the only resource that grows with use and is lost otherwise.
This obviously implies substantial digitalization that brings efficiency, documentary culture, the learning organization, and the measurement of learning/results far superior to the measurement of in-person conformity that we know well even at work, where the manager wants conformity, not talent, praises conformity not substantial innovation, creating many imitators cf. https://fs.blog/experts-vs-imitators/
Of course, it is a school where the teacher does research and substantial work instead of repeating the same old stuff every year, and many don't like this. After all, most people don't like to innovate. Improving what exists, yes, but venturing into unknown lands is something most oppose, both the common people who fear change and the ruling class who fear losing their acquired status. In the past, ruling classes sent their many children to explore, and if it went wrong, there were others. Today there is practically no more substantial innovation. People want to deny it, but it has always happened in history, the more it is denied, the more it happens through the interested hands of a few against the interest of the many, and the result is a changing of the guard among those in charge and consequent wars to create a new common people. We should have understood and solved this long ago, but it seems not...
Let's say if I had old-school BTC, mined personally or bought back in the day for very little fiat currency and today it's an enormously larger sum, I'd say it's time to not keep all my eggs in one basket and rebalance my portfolio.
For example, I'd say it's actually been time for a while now, ever since the crypto-tax wave start to hit, to convert into fiat currency and buy land, houses, assets that, IF the state doesn't collapse and they're chosen in reasonable areas, could still preserve significant value, allow you to flee to another country (houses purchased abroad) if necessary etc.
If someone had put 0.001% of their capital or even 0.01% into old-school BTC and today finds themselves with 50% of their capital in BTC, it's high time to give some thought to diversification.
Smart contracts will become the contracts of the future and NFTs will be digital identity is pretty obvious; we don't know WHO will be used by whom for these tasks, but it's clear that this is what they'll be because they're the most functional choice we have in the trend toward rules as code. The problem is that the market can stay irrational longer than we can stay solvent, so it's a gamble, but also a logical diversification in its own right as well.
The only highly uncertain element is the miners' ability to withstand long periods of loss.
I've looked at the Fediverse, objectively with little hope and many design issues, I'm watching Nostr with interest even though it seems more like a rough sketch lacking the ideas to move forward, but that concept of Gnus and Usenet, so simple in itself, still hasn't managed to resurface.
reply