Re: [dev] paste_AT_

From: Christoph Lohmann <>
Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2015 22:28:12 +0100


On Wed, 04 Nov 2015 22:28:12 +0100 Matthew of Boswell <> wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Nov 2015 17:26:28 +0100
> Christoph Lohmann <> wrote:
> > I consider e‐mail to be more suckless than the web, that’s why I’d
> > pro‐ pose a mail solution.
> I don't think that I'd want pastebin to email me with everyone's
> paste; my hard drive would fill up so fast I'd have to quit email.

Not really. Are you using floppy discs for your mailbox storage?

> It's an interesting idea. Please enlighten us as to how this wouldn't be
> just "pastebin in email".
> How about an example use case that demonstrates the superiority of this
> idea? Something that beats a regular web paste service. Example:

Two different views on how to communicate clash here:

1.) The web view is to have some URI and it's always available.
2.) The mail view of having your private mailbox you take care of.

The first view has shown problems in the past: Large corporations can
die, there’s no automatic archiving and the web isn’t really made for
archiving because of it’s dynamic content. Here’s the advantage of an e‐
mail: If you keep to the local cid: URIs or just (preferred) text/plain
you can replay the content whenever you want, how often you want and
wherever you want. The access to some URI doesn’t need to be secured or
kept open.

The idea of wanting a connection to a central database is what makes
surveillance effective and in the end will reduce your freedom to noth‐
ing. So keeping to a more »data packet« approach of spreading informa‐
tion is something I see as the suckless way of distributing data.

If the information is kept in the mailinglist format (mbox or whatever
export) it can be reprocessed with all kind of tools (that could be
written in the future based on those ideas). A web front end is just
one processing tool of the collected ordered information.

This discussion should lead to a different kind of thinking about how
suckless services actually can be approached without falling into the
web trap of suck. Thanks for all the responses.

> 1. I have a snippet of code (not a full program, etc.) that I want to
> collaborate on. I can't paste it into IRC/instant message/web forum,
> but I want people to be able to see it.
> At this point, I can use my own public HTTP server, public FTP, etc. In
> a group, I may be able to put the code onto a mailing list that we
> happen to share (like

Well, showing files in a directory can be done in many different ways.

> 2. I paste it on a gist with "gist < myfile.c", etc.

Everything can be abstracted into some access script. We all have mail

> 3. I send the URL over IRC/IM/web forum.
> 4. Interested reader(s) open the link in a web browser or gist reader.

This involves some JSON API and using the web.

> 5. Optionally, someone sends back a URL with some proposed changes.
> 6. If it's worth saving long-term, we set it to never expire.

That’s what one interface will serve.

> 7. Years later, someone searching for a solution stumbles upon the IRC
> log/forum and finds the linked paste.

... and github has declared bankruptcy and doesn't serve the content anymore.


Christoph Lohmann
Received on Wed Nov 04 2015 - 22:28:12 CET

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Thu Nov 05 2015 - 18:24:09 CET