Maximalism Is A Better Word
===========================
This word "minimalism" has been rolling around in the back of my head
for a couple of days now, ever since the e-mail that pointed out some
contemporary usage. Call me paranoid, but I feel like I need to
distance myself from that term now, since it seems to be bandied
about in a different context, in the world beyond my focus.

I don't want to be mistakenly associated with high-end hardware users
who feel "minimalism" is somehow attached to Mac use, but with
simpler icons or something superficial like that. And after someone
else messaged me to point out minimal linux, which in turn pays
homage to minimal mac, I am beginning to wonder if the word
"minimalism" is what I represent at all. Neither of those sites is at
all related to my own idea, and as a result, the term just seems...
wrong.

I might just follow suit with Computing Minimalists, who suggested
that perhaps "maximalism" is a better way of describing it.

In one manner of speaking, it seems to make sense: Getting the best
available performance out of obsolete hardware, by relying on free
and open source software that doesn't tax the system to the point of
being unusable. And in turn, avoiding buying new computers, keeping
old ones in service, and hopefully preserving a small slice of the
environment as a consequence.

Yeah, maximalism. I like that. :mrgreen:

I don't knock the minimalists; I have no opinion one way or another
if you think Gnome with a simple, straight-line icon set is minimal.
I don't care if you are reducing your world to only one iPad, one
iPod and one iMac, all with the same simple straight-line icon set.
However you conduct your war on opulence in modern culture, I support
your freedom and right to choose, probably even more than you do.

In the mean time though, some of us will be carrying out our own
little wars, pushing antiques and throwaway machines to perform in
ways contemporary software and hardware manufacturers would probably
prefer you didn't know about. Like writing blog posts from a
14-year-old computer running modern, customized, bulletproof,
rock-solid software that didn't cost a cent. >:)

Yes, that is a much better word for it.

From:
<https://kmandla.wordpress.com/2010/05/05/maximalism-is-a-better-word/>

Ben Collver <bencollver@tilde.pink> wrote or quoted:
>This word "minimalism" has been rolling around in the back of my head
>for a couple of days now, ever since the e-mail that pointed out some
>contemporary usage.

I ain't too sure what that usage pointed out in that e-mail
was, but I did catch wind that Cal Newport dropped a book
called "Digital Minimalism." From what I gathered, it's about
dialing back our use of social media and electronic devices.

Otherwise, here's the scoop on the traditional meaning from the
20th century:

- A school of abstract painting emphasing simplification of form

- Use of the fewest and barest essentials in the arts or design

- A school of contemporary music marked by extreme simplification

At the end of the day, that term might be a tad on the
nebulous side, 'cause certainly nothing is as complex as
the creation of a minimal system!

Ben Collver <bencollver@tilde.pink> wrote at 16:58 this Wednesday (GMT):
> Maximalism Is A Better Word
>===========================
> This word "minimalism" has been rolling around in the back of my head
> for a couple of days now, ever since the e-mail that pointed out some
> contemporary usage. Call me paranoid, but I feel like I need to
> distance myself from that term now, since it seems to be bandied
> about in a different context, in the world beyond my focus.
>
> I don't want to be mistakenly associated with high-end hardware users
> who feel "minimalism" is somehow attached to Mac use, but with
> simpler icons or something superficial like that. And after someone
> else messaged me to point out minimal linux, which in turn pays
> homage to minimal mac, I am beginning to wonder if the word
> "minimalism" is what I represent at all. Neither of those sites is at
> all related to my own idea, and as a result, the term just seems...
> wrong.
>
> I might just follow suit with Computing Minimalists, who suggested
> that perhaps "maximalism" is a better way of describing it.
>
> In one manner of speaking, it seems to make sense: Getting the best
> available performance out of obsolete hardware, by relying on free
> and open source software that doesn't tax the system to the point of
> being unusable. And in turn, avoiding buying new computers, keeping
> old ones in service, and hopefully preserving a small slice of the
> environment as a consequence.
>
> Yeah, maximalism. I like that. :mrgreen:
>
> I don't knock the minimalists; I have no opinion one way or another
> if you think Gnome with a simple, straight-line icon set is minimal.
> I don't care if you are reducing your world to only one iPad, one
> iPod and one iMac, all with the same simple straight-line icon set.
> However you conduct your war on opulence in modern culture, I support
> your freedom and right to choose, probably even more than you do.
>
> In the mean time though, some of us will be carrying out our own
> little wars, pushing antiques and throwaway machines to perform in
> ways contemporary software and hardware manufacturers would probably
> prefer you didn't know about. Like writing blog posts from a
> 14-year-old computer running modern, customized, bulletproof,
> rock-solid software that didn't cost a cent. >:)
>
> Yes, that is a much better word for it.
>
> From:
><https://kmandla.wordpress.com/2010/05/05/maximalism-is-a-better-word/>

I agree with trying to get the most out of old stuff, but at some point
it does feel restricting.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

Ben Collver <bencollver@tilde.pink> didn't write:
>
> In the mean time though, some of us will be carrying out our own
> little wars, pushing antiques and throwaway machines to perform in
> ways contemporary software and hardware manufacturers would probably
> prefer you didn't know about. Like writing blog posts from a
> 14-year-old computer running modern, customized, bulletproof,
> rock-solid software that didn't cost a cent. >:)
>
> From:
> <https://kmandla.wordpress.com/2010/05/05/maximalism-is-a-better-word/>

I've got that now-abandoned blog bookmarked on this computer which
was of a similar age to the author's when that was written in 2010.
Unfortunately their website has now adopted the obsession of
redirecting HTTP to HTTPS, so that web browser can no longer load
it directly.

P.S. Mentioning the publication date of these reposted articles at
the start would make them clearer.

--
__ __
#_ < |\| |< _#

On 2 May 2024 08:41:42 +1000, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:

> Unfortunately their website has now adopted the obsession of
> redirecting HTTP to HTTPS, so that web browser can no longer load
> it directly.

Don’t fight HTTPS. It’s for your own good.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
> On 2 May 2024 08:41:42 +1000, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>
>> Unfortunately their website has now adopted the obsession of
>> redirecting HTTP to HTTPS, so that web browser can no longer load
>> it directly.
>
> Don't fight HTTPS. It's for your own good.

I've been fighting it since it stopped being for my own good. Go on
tell me how my life would be worse if I were to browse that blog
over an unencrypted HTTP connection...

--
__ __
#_ < |\| |< _#

On 2024-05-02, Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote:
> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2 May 2024 08:41:42 +1000, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>>
>>> Unfortunately their website has now adopted the obsession of
>>> redirecting HTTP to HTTPS, so that web browser can no longer load
>>> it directly.
>>
>> Don't fight HTTPS. It's for your own good.
>
> I've been fighting it since it stopped being for my own good. Go on
> tell me how my life would be worse if I were to browse that blog
> over an unencrypted HTTP connection...

https is about lock-in and security theatre. Go look how many root CAs
are in your browser, and tell me none of them will ever issue certs to
bad guys, accidentally or otherwise.

I firmly believe Google has an endgame, with Chrome and https, of creating
a closed content delivery system that is only accessible to paying (large)
organisations. The internet will become cable TV, with pay-per-view.

(Apply metallic millinery to taste)

--
Ian

"Tamahome!!!" - "Miaka!!!"

Ian wrote or quoted:
>https is about lock-in and security theatre. Go look how many root CAs
>are in your browser, and tell me none of them will ever issue certs to
>bad guys, accidentally or otherwise.

With HTTP, it's a cakewalk for the client-side to analyze traffic
and suppress unwanted content. Insofar as HTTPS makes such measures
more difficult, it can actually reduce security to a certain degree.

Moreover, HTTPS could engender a false sense of security.
(As you wrote.)

On 2024-05-03, Stefan Ram <ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
> With HTTP, it's a cakewalk for the client-side to analyze traffic
> and suppress unwanted content. Insofar as HTTPS makes such measures
> more difficult, it can actually reduce security to a certain degree.
>
> Moreover, HTTPS could engender a false sense of security.
> (As you wrote.)

HTTPS has also been used for censorship, as the certificate authorities
are centrally controlled, they can be used to take sites down.

Ben Collver <bencollver@tilde.pink> wrote at 14:35 this Friday (GMT):
> On 2024-05-03, Stefan Ram <ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
>> With HTTP, it's a cakewalk for the client-side to analyze traffic
>> and suppress unwanted content. Insofar as HTTPS makes such measures
>> more difficult, it can actually reduce security to a certain degree.
>>
>> Moreover, HTTPS could engender a false sense of security.
>> (As you wrote.)
>
> HTTPS has also been used for censorship, as the certificate authorities
> are centrally controlled, they can be used to take sites down.

There's a error code for "Unavailable for legal reasons". (code 451)
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

On 3 May 2024 07:59:51 +1000, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:

> Go on tell me how my life would be worse if I were to browse that blog
> over an unencrypted HTTP connection...

When HTTPS is used routinely, the authorities cannot use it as a filter to
mark out certain people who might be worth spying on.

On Fri, 3 May 2024 14:35:43 -0000 (UTC), Ben Collver wrote:

> HTTPS has also been used for censorship, as the certificate authorities
> are centrally controlled, they can be used to take sites down.

Last I checked, there was no restriction on which CAs could issue certs
for which domains. For example, Let’s Encrypt can issue a cert for any
domain--you just have to prove to them you control that domain.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
> On 3 May 2024 07:59:51 +1000, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>
>> Go on tell me how my life would be worse if I were to browse that blog
>> over an unencrypted HTTP connection...
>
> When HTTPS is used routinely, the authorities cannot use it as a filter to
> mark out certain people who might be worth spying on.

People the authorities might target use VPNs and/or Tor for
encryption.

Such a filter wouldn't work anyway even if blogs like that didn't
demand it. HTTPS would still be used frequently by normal people
when it is actually useful, for protecting private information that
they send and receive.

--
__ __
#_ < |\| |< _#

On 28 Jul 2024 16:54:26 +1000, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:

> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>> On 3 May 2024 07:59:51 +1000, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>>
>>> Go on tell me how my life would be worse if I were to browse that blog
>>> over an unencrypted HTTP connection...
>>
>> When HTTPS is used routinely, the authorities cannot use it as a filter
>> to mark out certain people who might be worth spying on.
>
> People the authorities might target use VPNs and/or Tor for encryption.

In some countries, they already do.