Hello Digital Man!

** On Friday 31.12.21 - 21:22, Digital Man wrote to apam:

It's always possible that a network could be formed (or
switch to) a non-FTN technoloy.

Or.. perhaps FTN2 could be something that only supports modern
and still-in-development software?

However, before anything "new" is proposed, I suggest a
careful examination of what is wrong with the current
technology (FTN). I've started my own list here:

Didn't know that existed. I have some questions. I'll probably
build that up in FUTURE4FIDO.

Yeah, probably a dead end. There's the occasional
discussion of the same subject on FidoNet proper (e.g.
Future4fido echo), but I don't think it's ever going to
amount to much because of the compatiblity issue.

Again.. perhaps the answer is to retire the support for
abandoned software. It's not unlike the progression in www with
html to html5 and other layers. Many sites would simply not
work with Netscape for example, and not many users of Netscape
would stick to using it.



--- OpenXP 5.0.51
* Origin: Ogg's WestCoast Point (21:4/106.21)

Re: what is wrong with the current technology (FTN)
By: Ogg to Digital Man on Sat Jan 01 2022 10:48 am

Hello Digital Man!

** On Friday 31.12.21 - 21:22, Digital Man wrote to apam:

It's always possible that a network could be formed (or
switch to) a non-FTN technoloy.

Or.. perhaps FTN2 could be something that only supports modern
and still-in-development software?

And "still-in-development" is a dynamic state (what's in-development today may not be tomorrow), so it's more of a sign of the times. In any case, I'd look closely at other network technologies (e.g. WWIVnet, NNTP, QWK, PostLink) before inventing a new noe. At the very least, you can take away the best ideas to be utilized in a new network technology. I would not recommend trying to tying anything "new" to FidoNet however. That's just asking for trouble. :-)

However, before anything "new" is proposed, I suggest a
careful examination of what is wrong with the current
technology (FTN). I've started my own list here:

Didn't know that existed. I have some questions. I'll probably
build that up in FUTURE4FIDO.

Yeah, probably a dead end. There's the occasional
discussion of the same subject on FidoNet proper (e.g.
Future4fido echo), but I don't think it's ever going to
amount to much because of the compatiblity issue.

Again.. perhaps the answer is to retire the support for
abandoned software. It's not unlike the progression in www with
html to html5 and other layers. Many sites would simply not
work with Netscape for example, and not many users of Netscape
would stick to using it.

Nobody's stopping old web sites using old versions of HTML from still working however. If you have a retro computer with Mosaic, it's still gonna work on those sites, which is pretty cool. I can see similar arguments being made about FidoNet. Dust off that old IBM XT from the 1980s and its still possible to get it on FidoNet using (much of) the software of that era.
--
digital man (rob)

This Is Spinal Tap quote #5:
Nigel Tufnel: Authorities said... best leave it... unsolved.
Norco, CA WX: 59.0øF, 25.0% humidity, 3 mph WSW wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs --- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
* Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (21:1/183)

Hello Digital Man!

** On Saturday 01.01.22 - 12:48, Digital Man wrote to Ogg:

Or.. perhaps FTN2 could be something that only supports modern
and still-in-development software?

And "still-in-development" is a dynamic state (what's in-
development today may not be tomorrow), so it's more of a
sign of the times.

I think it could be very straightforward. Just stipulate that
in order to participate in FTN2, certain NEW minimums (and in
this case a higher bar) must be met.

In any case, I'd look closely at other network
technologies (e.g. WWIVnet, NNTP, QWK, PostLink) before
inventing a new noe.

JamNNTP is fairly impressive. It affords reading echos from
one's own mail program. I think the vision ought to be what can
support the average non-sysop/user.

At the very least, you can take away the best ideas to be
utilized in a new network technology. I would not
recommend trying to tying anything "new" to FidoNet
however. That's just asking for trouble. :-)

Aww.. where's your sense of adventure?

Again.. perhaps the answer is to retire the support for
abandoned software. It's not unlike the progression in www..

Nobody's stopping old web sites using old versions of HTML
from still working however. If you have a retro computer
with Mosaic, it's still gonna work on those sites, which
is pretty cool. I can see similar arguments being made
about FidoNet. Dust off that old IBM XT from the 1980s and
its still possible to get it on FidoNet using (much of)
the software of that era. --

The novelty to try Fido 1.0 might be interesting, but is it
practical and useful on a regular basis or in the long run?
Probably not. Same thing with Mosaic - it might be fun as a
curiosity to re-experience its limitations, but then the
limitations can get old fast. ;)




--- OpenXP 5.0.51
* Origin: Ogg's WestCoast Point (21:4/106.21)

Re: what is wrong with the current technology (FTN)
By: Ogg to Digital Man on Tue Jan 04 2022 07:28 pm

Hello Digital Man!

** On Saturday 01.01.22 - 12:48, Digital Man wrote to Ogg:

Or.. perhaps FTN2 could be something that only supports modern
and still-in-development software?

And "still-in-development" is a dynamic state (what's in-
development today may not be tomorrow), so it's more of a
sign of the times.

I think it could be very straightforward. Just stipulate that
in order to participate in FTN2, certain NEW minimums (and in
this case a higher bar) must be met.

Then just call it something else entirely.

In any case, I'd look closely at other network
technologies (e.g. WWIVnet, NNTP, QWK, PostLink) before
inventing a new noe.

JamNNTP is fairly impressive. It affords reading echos from
one's own mail program. I think the vision ought to be what can
support the average non-sysop/user.

JamNNTP (as I understand it) is just an NNTP service that uses JAM to store the news articles. Much like Synchronet's nntpservice.js. If you think NNTP is an ideal networking technology, just use that. No need to invent something new.

At the very least, you can take away the best ideas to be
utilized in a new network technology. I would not
recommend trying to tying anything "new" to FidoNet
however. That's just asking for trouble. :-)

Aww.. where's your sense of adventure?

I enjoy adventures in technology, not personality. :-)

Again.. perhaps the answer is to retire the support for
abandoned software. It's not unlike the progression in www..

Nobody's stopping old web sites using old versions of HTML
from still working however. If you have a retro computer
with Mosaic, it's still gonna work on those sites, which
is pretty cool. I can see similar arguments being made
about FidoNet. Dust off that old IBM XT from the 1980s and
its still possible to get it on FidoNet using (much of)
the software of that era. --

The novelty to try Fido 1.0 might be interesting, but is it
practical and useful on a regular basis or in the long run?
Probably not. Same thing with Mosaic - it might be fun as a
curiosity to re-experience its limitations, but then the
limitations can get old fast. ;)

Yup, but it's still a thing that people are interested in doing even if just sporadically or for short periods of time.
--
digital man (rob)

Breaking Bad quote #17:
Your breath could knock the buzzard off a shit wagon. - Hank
Norco, CA WX: 68.3øF, 44.0% humidity, 2 mph W wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
* Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (21:1/183)