[Starlink] impressed with my starlink today

[Frantisek Borsik]

The problem with Galene and in general, with almost everything open-source
based per se, is its ANTI user GUI, setup process, documentation…

Unnecessary barriers to entry for regular people we want to help, right?
But instead of doing everything in our powers to tear these barriers down,
most of the open source projects IMHO is even taking a big pride in this
clunkiness, terrible geeky way of doing stuff, feeling like an “inner
circle” of those that are “in the know.”

“Only 10 minutes to setup” - means no general public will ever use it en
masses!

It’s shooting our own foot.

If we really want to actually help the people, we should do anything
possible in order to improve UX/UI, to give the world (general public) know
what we (insert anything open source, like Galene as an alternative to Zoom
and the like) actually do and why it’s not only an alternative but why it’s
actually better.

It means (in no particular order) better UX/UI, sharing information on
social media, easy setup and onboarding, better and more accessible (almost
to my grandmother) documentation -
going above and beyond.

Galene should be great - I’m willing to help to make it usable as easily as
fucking Zoom. But are Galene guys really willing to make that leap?


All the best,

Frank
Frantisek (Frank) Borsik

https://www.linkedin.com/in/frantisekborsik
Signal, Telegram, WhatsApp: +421919416714
iMessage, mobile: +420775230885
Skype: casioa5302ca
frantisek.borsik at gmail.com


On Mon, 18 Sep 2023 at 8:40 PM, Michael Richardson via Starlink <
starlink at lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:

>
> Juliusz Chroboczek via Starlink <starlink at lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
>     > We're currently using receiver-driven congestion control, which is
>     > deprecated in WebRTC.  The plan is to switch to sender-driven
> congestion
>     > control at some point (I'm no big fan, but that's what everyone is
>     > implementing, and we better be compatible with the rest of the
> universe).
>
> ...
>
>     > (I could in principle use receiver-driven for the downstream and
>     > sender-driven for the upstream, thus using libwebrtc's excellent
>     > controllers in both directions, but it really feels like a hack.  I'd
>     > much rather not negociate receiver-driven at all.)
>
> If I understand correctly, galene would support p2p media streams?
> The web page seems to focus on lecture style.
>
> It seems to me that if you have multiple outgoing streams, that if there
> are
> problems with any of them, a sender-driven system allows for better use of
> what is typically a smaller uplink.
>
> --
> ]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh
> networks [
> ]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        |    IoT
> architect   [
> ]     mcr at sandelman.ca  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on
> rails    [
>
> _______________________________________________
> Starlink mailing list
> Starlink at lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/starlink/attachments/20230918/44314e5e/attachment.html>