• 0 Posts
  • 29 Comments
Joined 10 months ago
cake
Cake day: February 16th, 2024

help-circle


  • kata1yst@sh.itjust.workstolinuxmemes@lemmy.worldWhat if...
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    20 days ago

    No idea how I’m supposed to take this ranty blog needlessly interspersed with furry cartoons seriously. But it’s basically just restating (poorly) all the same criticisms and alternatives written about here: https://www.latacora.com/blog/2019/07/16/the-pgp-problem/

    The ‘real’ criticisms of PGP are that it’s old, it’s clunky, and it doesn’t support forward secrecy by design. None of that is invalid, but I think the importance of those points depends on the use case and user.

    The alternatives given are myriad and complexity and clunkiness are interspersed between dozens of solutions instead of well understood and documented in one tool.

    That isn’t a superior approach. I’m not arguing that PGP is perfect, but it’s absolutely asinine to suggest (like this blog and others suggest) that the solution is to use dozens of other solutions with their own problems and with less auditing.

    If we’re going to replace PGP, we need to do it properly in a centralized library/toolchain. Breaking up the solution and spreading it around just magnifies the problems.





  • kata1yst@sh.itjust.workstolinuxmemes@lemmy.worldYeah...
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Different caller, same question.

    The BSDs I’ve used are extremely well documented and cohesive. No basic tools or functions are missing and everything works very simply and together as a whole. The tooling they put forward in the 2000s like DTrace, ZFS, jails, bhyve, were simply unmatched for their capabilities at the time. Having all those tools on a simple and fast OS at the time felt like living in the future.

    At the same time, BSD is severely lacking in gaming, graphics performance, compatibility with modern ecosystems, ease of use for less technical users, and generally seems to have stagnated in the last 10-15 or so years. Some chalk that up to leadership, some to the license / corporate interests largely moving to Linux, who knows. But these days I use Linux and while I miss the halcyon days of BSD, I wouldn’t switch back.











  • Its dangerous to send goalposts flying around that fast, be careful or you’ll hurt yourself.

    Your response is condescending, arguing from ignorance, and arguing in bad faith. I will reply this time, because once again you’re trying to build an argument on extremely shaky ground and I don’t enjoy people spreading ignorance unchallenged. However I won’t engage any further and feed whatever you think you’re getting from this.

    I haven’t suggested that people should use Obsidian over OSS solutions. I was simply pointing out your argument against Obsidian’s architecture was poorly founded.

    The data you’re insinuating will be lost is pure FUD. While the format isn’t standard markdown, none of the well implemented solutions are, because as you so rightly pointed out, markdown has little to no support for most of these features.

    However, obsidian’s format is well documented and well understood. There are dozens of FOSS plugins and tools for converting or directly importing obsidian data to nearly every other solution. Due to obsidian’s popularity, it’s interoperability this way is often far superior to FOSS solutions’.


  • Content is your notes. In obsidian this is represented by markdown files in a flat filesystem. This format is already cross platform and doesn’t need to be exported.

    Metadata is extracted information from your notes that makes processing the data more efficient. Tags, links, timestamp, keywords, titles, filenames, etc are metadata, stored in the metadata database. When you search for something in obsidian, or view the graph, or list files in a tag etc obsidian only opens the metadata database to process the request. It only opens the file for read/write.

    Does this help?



  • This isn’t really the case though. Obsidian uses a database for metadata, and therefore can extremely rapidly display, search, and find the correct file to open. It generally only opens a handful of files at a time.

    I’ve used obsidian notes repos with hundreds of thousands of notes with no discernable performance impact. Something LogSeq certainly couldn’t do.

    The complaint in the post you’ve linked is a) anecdotal and b) about the import process itself getting slow, which makes sense as obsidian is extracting the metadata.

    I’ll always champion OSS software over proprietary, but claiming this is a huge failing of the obsidian design is just completely false. A metadata database fronting a flat filesystem architecture is very robust.

    Edit: adding link to benchmark. https://www.goedel.io/p/interlude-obsidian-vs-100000