[nycbug-talk] ancient protocals

[Mikel King]

Isaac Levy <ike at lesmuug.org> wrote:
__________
>Forking the thread,
>Re: [nycbug-talk] IRC SERVER
>
>On Jun 16, 2004, at 4:38 PM, Bob Ippolito wrote:
>
>>> I've heard cool things about silc, but I'm +1 for sticking to IRC- 
>>> there's good reason it's been around so long...
>>
>> Yeah, the same reason people use POP3 and other retarded protocols.. 
>> the specs are too stupid to get wrong so the client-server software 
>> interaction generally works as expected.  No real good reason other 
>> than that :)
>
>Completely understandable, but I'd rather argue that SMTP is flawed 
>analogous to IRC, (rather than POP3) due to the fact that the world 
>still continues to use Email due to larger than a critical mass 
>adopting it, regardless of it's flaws.
>
>I'd also argue that for sanity's sake, some contexts make 
>ancient/flawed protocols a good choice to use, especially when they 
>aren't one's primary focus- (i.e. wanting to just use it and not get 
>bogged down training people how to use it, or managing the 
>software/infrastructure to maintain it).  If that makes sense.
>
>I'm not opposed to change, the opposite in fact, but I'd rather focus 
>on changing the things I can, and accept what is out of my personal 
>scope (as I begrudgingly do when using email daily).
>
>Again, this is tempered by a whopping IMHO- and am interested in any 
>opposing viewpoint...
>
>Rocket-
>.ike
>
>_______________________________________________
>talk mailing list
>talk at lists.nycbug.org
>http://lists.nycbug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk

smoke signals, Teletype, or tin cans with string?