Comment by ch71r22
7 hours ago
Beaker Browser was so cool! Paul Frazee and Tara Vancil. It was always super experimental. I think it ended when Paul left to join other decentralization-focused devs starting to build Bluesky and the AT Protocol.
The way I remember it, back then they were building Beaker on dat in collaboration with dat devs, which I think was basically just Mathias Buus (mafintosh) who was part of an org called Hyperdivision. Now Mathias is continuing the dat/hypercore stuff at Holepunch (building Keet and Pears). It still seems cool, but I think a lot of the most exciting stuff in the dat ecosystem stopped when Paul Frazee left
So I think that original Beaker/dat/hypercore vision has probably moved mostly into the AT Protocol (Bluesky, tangled, etc.). I haven't been following that as much lately. I wonder if anyone is working on something like Beaker Browser for the AT Protocol, or if that even makes sense
yeah, absolutely false.
paul pfrazees beaker browser was just one of many dat ecosystem proje ts even though a popular one. keet is also a dat ecosystem project.
quibble is just the latest addition and linked elsewhere in this thread and an open source version of keet.
there is an active dat rust implementation.
you also have a sql relation database primitive on top of dat and the hyper stack now
and datweb will be released soon.
at proto has nothing to do with p2p at all and its just pfrazee who moved on.
the holepunch company mainly focuses on building the closed source keet app and the bare and pear runtime to make it easy to built cross platform p2p application.
they also maintain a lot of the underlying hyper stack that has grown and matured and is essentially the foundation of dat ecosystem, but there are many projects.
you also have an interview of mathias buus presenting holepunch/keet on the dat ecosystem blog, so sadly your view seems quite distorted for some reason, ...unless you are getting paid to plug at proto
"yeah, absolutely false" is offputting to read, especially when you're not contracting anything said there. you're confirming a bunch of it, and adding more.
as a reader with only a little emotional investment here (but some), i want to tell you your message would spread much better if you could shape it some other way. your post has a lot of good material. but man that is really not fun to read, couched so adversarially.
this is something i work on myself. often i think there is real reason to take a person to task, and to respond strongly, but trying to keep the broader audience in mind. and: i don't think that was the case here.