Should look into 9Front, and perhaps Mothra browser  

just keep in mind that mothra doesn't do JS. it might work on the current webcit (I'll have to try it) but doubtful it will work with the new one, and definitely not with xterm.js.


I find the mouse inefficient. I'll use it when I need to, but if I can do what I need to do without it, i'll skip it. i'm quite fond of the text client for that reason, but wouldn't be objectionable to something like xterm.js either. i'd spin it up in a minimal browser and just let it sit there, alt-tab to it when i wanted to use it. Which is pretty much how I survive modern OS's anyway.

What do you think? Do you use the text client because it's your
preferred experience and you don't care what software provides it, or

do you use it specifically because it doesn
't require a browser?

The second one. The environment that I connect from does not even have X (or Wayland, or Windows, you get the idea).

If you need some extra hands on the text client, I might be able to make some of my time available as a way of giving back.

To be clear -- we will never discontinue the regular terminal option. What is under consideration is building a text client experience that is optimized for a *known* terminal. The fact that we can now count on the basic set of ANSI escape sequences being there 100% of the time got us pretty far -- for example, we can now turn on color without worrying about whether the user's terminal supports it. I'm interested in taking that even further. For example, I'd like to enable the status line, a full screen editor, and sixel graphics.
But those are things that require a bit more of a controlled environment, which xterm.js would be.

Also I uninstalled Kitty after finding out how widely the rest of the industry is working to standardize Sixel graphics.

Hi there.

I have noticed that when I connect to the Uncensored Citalde instance, it spills some weird characters just after the access prompt that look quite like color control?

My current terminal is xterm and it gives me a black and white Citadel experience. I tried with a different Terminal emulator and got a full colorful rainbow experience so that is when I realized there is color support.

Yes. There were some changes to it just a couple of days ago but it's always been more or less like this --

When you connect to the client, it sends out a terminal inquiry and waits one second. Just about any modern terminal will answer back with its capabilities, and the Citadel client then knows that it's dealing with a reasonably ANSI-capable terminal so it will display the client in color.

If there is no answer, we assume a "dumb" terminal and output no color or any other terminal control sequences. I just tried it with xterm and got full color, so I'm not sure what is different between my xterm and your xterm.

But I thought you were accessing Uncensored using a locally installed copy of the client and connecting over the darknet?

2024-09-09 21:30 from IGnatius T Foobar
Yes. There were some changes to it just a couple of days ago but it's

always been more or less like this --

When you connect to the client, it sends out a terminal inquiry and

waits one second. Just about any modern terminal will answer back with

its capabilities, and the Citadel client then knows that it's dealing

with a reasonably ANSI-capable terminal so it will display the client

in color.

If there is no answer, we assume a "dumb" terminal and output no color

or any other terminal control sequences. I just tried it with xterm

and got full color, so I'm not sure what is different between my xterm

and your xterm.

But I thought you were accessing Uncensored using a locally installed

copy of the client and connecting over the

darknet?

Then I bet the problem is the terminal capabilities enquiry is likely to take more than one second over i2p and cause unreliable results XD

I have a standard i2p tunnel running on a router which points to Uncensored's telnet i2p service. I connect to that tunnel remoely using a VPN through sucky networks. Latency is bound to be bad.

I have a standard i2p tunnel running on a router which points to
Uncensored's telnet i2p service. I connect to that tunnel remoely using

a VPN through sucky networks. Latency is bound to be bad.

Oooh, that might do it. And I fear that making the detect loop more than one second might be a big turnoff for people on low latency fast networks.
Do you have a machine on which you could run your own copy of the client?
The user experience is far better that way anyway.