That website was the fastest loading website I’ve ever visited.
this post was submitted on 26 Feb 2025
274 points (96.9% liked)
Technology
63375 readers
5204 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I felt like I was back in the 2000s when I first got cable internet, but before ads took over everything.
You made me click the link out of pure skepticism. You were not exaggerating.
Static webpage generator like Hugo, probably.
You'd like the mcmaster-carr website.
That thing loaded before I even click the link.
It loaded quicker than this comment section on my Lemmy app
You will probably be a fan of https://kagi.com/, then. I know it’s what I first noticed and what stood out to me a couple years back…
I pay for and use kagi, but it is one of the slowest websites I use, so I am not really sure what this comment is referencing? Is it fast for others?
Me with folders upon folders of plain .txt:
I migrated from mediawiki to markdown in git 8 years ago and never looked back. The ability to publish to any number of static site hosts, and use any number of editors, some that have preview mode, is rad. Data liberty, data portability, wide support, easy to convert, easy to grep, good enough for 95% of written notes.
My biggest gripe is poor support for tables of data.
Ugh tables are really the killer. If my editor doesn't support tables then I avoid them like the plague.
org-mode
I don't use it though. I tried and forgot
What do you mainly use that supports tables?
I use obsidian. It have been pretty happy with it's table support lately. It used to be much worse.
Man alive, all that time I wasted learning LaTeX in that case. Supports tables properly, "floats" pictures and figures about without messing up the flow of text, exceptional support for equations, beautiful printed output...
Suffers from a completely insane macro-writing language, and its markup is more intrusive in the text than markdown's is. Also, if you have very specific formatting output requirements (for a receiving publication, for instance) then it can be somewhat painful to whip into shape. Plain-text gang forever, though.
haaave you heard about our lord and saviour Typst?
same layout algorithm as LaTeX, but:
- simpler markup
- sane, consistent scripting language
- fast compilation, including incremental updates so you can have a process watching your file and instantly create a new PDF on changes
- easy collaborative editing through their web app
- actually understandable error messages
Now that sounds interesting!
AFAIK there's no way to format an underline in markdown.
Anyone know of a workaround?
Think html renders. May not be exactly right but where I'd start
There will be a few tickets available at the box office tonight.
the sauna picture was a weird example though...
Interesting stuff, but my main takeaway is that very little of my output is worth keeping! (Who's going to need out-of-context Star Trek shitposts in 20 years?)
I wholly disagree with this after using markdown for everything for a few reasons, but it may work for some people if you really love operating from a basic CLI. Some people also get by with storing everything in plain-text files as well. Why not, plain-text will still be supported as well.
Markdown, especially CommonMark, will likely never provide what you want. Is it convenient when you have hundreds or thousands of files to manually manage? Most likely you'll constantly be searching for ways to make markdown work more like a word processor & CMS, because what you really want is a powerful WYSIWYG content management platform.
I'm not going to judge someone if they are content with basic markdown. It isn't my place to. But to make a statement like, "if it is worth keeping, save it in Markdown" is preaching from a bubble.
The articles point was that markdown (or other similar utf-8 text based documents) is the best guarantee you have for the files being usable into the indefinite future. As you get into the complicated formats of things like word processors the less likely that format will be meaningfully usable in 10,20,50 years time, good luck reading a obsolete word processor file from the 80s today.
LibreOffice opens my old WordPerfect documents just fine. What didn't last was the compact diskettes that some of them were lost to.
WordPerfect really comes from a different time. Good look reading the stuff from your iOS notes app that saves everything somewhere in the cloud and that has no export option in 10 years.
Preposterous. You need only install the iCloud client, and they (along with everything else in your iCloud drive) sync just fine.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Agree and disagree. There is a place for sophisticated management tools but when they stop getting supported or they're purchase by a company you hate, you're left scrambling to convert everything.
Best case for me anyway are sophisticated tools that use markdown as the basis of their files like Obsidian. So I know if they disappear I still have all my data in a universal format without any effort on my end.
The important thing is that it needs to be in a human-readable format encoded as unicode text. Beyond that, any reasonable markup (plaintext, markdown, org-mode, HTML, etc.) is fine.
WYSIWYG, Word Processors and CMSs are the kind of thing I don't even want for my current content (or any content I made in the last 25+ years), why would I want any of them as an archive format?
load more comments
(4 replies)
The problem with Markdown is it kind of sucks. CommonMark didn't even defragment the markdown world, since there are numerous incompatible extensions. It seems like gfm is the best among them, or at least the most featureful.
I know there are other options like RST or AsciiDoc, but I don't know which among them is actually "the best."
I have a tendency to jump between different note-taking services. Markdown seems like it could maybe be a cure for me.. By now i have no idea where I should look for a note I know I’ve taken, is it in notion, onenote, apple notes, and so on..
gotta hop on obsidian, everybody's doin it
Obligatory Logseq vote
Idk, I would be cautious about trusting my personal notes to a proprietary piece of software...
it's just markdown files lol
I've tried a few different note taking apps but I'm sticking with obsidian even though it is not open source because it saves everything in a simple folder structure as markdown files and simple images. I like that even without the program you can just search for the names of the images or notes on your system.
I use Obsidian with Zettel Notes on my phone to access and edit the MD files in Obsidian, as it is much faster for dashing off a quick note. ZN also has tools that allow you to save a web page or selection as MD which is very handy indeed.
load more comments
(4 replies)
No print it, everything digital needs a fairly complex machinery to work.
Do both and use the digital copy to print a new physical copy every x years.
Handwritten HTML with limited tags works just as well for many purposes (just forbid div, span, and a few others and the complexity you see in most webpages evaporates). The important part is using a text-based format from which information can be extracted even if the fancier display protocols become obsolete.
Which is markdown
Not really. HTML has a formal standard and definition that covers how to properly handle most corner cases that can arise when displaying it. Markdown has no overarching formal standard and exists in multiple dialects which are not always compatible with each other.
On the gripping hand, HTML involves more keystrokes (and technically speaking you need to include a bit of boilerplate in the file for it to be proper HTML). So it depends on whether you're willing to do a bit more typing to make sure that no one can possibly confuse your italics with boldface.
Tags interfere with human readability. Open any markdown file with a text editor in plain text and you can basically read the whole thing as it was intended to be read, with possibly the exception of tables.
There's a time and a place for different things, but I like markdown for human readable source text. HTML might be standardized enough that you can do a lot more with it, but the source file itself generally isn't as readable.
Was Is
I like more Org Mode but I know that Markdown now is more universal. But... The best of both formatos is that I can use any plain text editor for read and editing it
view more: next ›