I don't think anybody needs all of the features at once but people have different preferences. E.g. I typically do well without bold formatting (I only need one level of emphasis which is served well by italic) but I want tables, links and lists very often.
Also I like the WYSIWYG feature of Markdown where it has an advantage over the traditional Markup languages like HTML, LaTeX, groff etc. of being easier to read in the text file. Dedicated syntax highlighting can go a long way to make markup easier to read, though.
I don't think that is sufficient for the general case because I would like to be able to use the markdown like _emphasis_ or [hyperlinks](https://www.example.com) even inside the table rows and this doesn't render properly when using fixed pitch “tables as source code blocks”
The original Markdown has fewer features than listed for the more advanced formats in the table. Hence if someone uses reStructuredText it is more precise than just saying “Markdown” because Markown could refer to anything from the original minimalist featureset to the vastly extended format supported by pandoc if given the appropriate CLI arguments.
Some text-based formats have more options for tables e.g. alignment of columns (it may help with numbers to right-align them) or multirow/multicolumn options.
Some formats support definition lists (corresponds to <dl> in HTML) - a feature which I often find valuable but was not included in the original Markdown IIRC.
One advantage of using a text-based format is that it can be exported to either LaTeX or HTML and Markdown seems to prefer the HTML output by explicitly supporting inline HTML as an escape hatch for more complex constructs (e.g. tables with rowspan/colspan). In addition to often not being supported for a non-HTML export-type it also hurts the WYSIWYG experience when reading the file like plain text.
I am not so much into videos but due to some extended interest in the matter I decided to watch the recording of that talk and I do not regret it. Much recommended to everyone who is interested in the state of the art of precision time synchronization over network. Also, in my opinion this talk is presented masterfully with most of the time actually spent on a convincing live demo.
Fun to think of it but I think my website actually got removed from that list because it has a logo on top of each page. It is available as “text only” (although not text/plain but text/markdown) by substituting the .xhtml with .md in the URL unlike some other pages on the textonly.website list, though :)
The only thing you might be missing: I don't think it helps many people really.
I personally still like the feature because I put my website under a free software license and then it is only fitting that you could view the actual source code. Having the `.md` next to the `.xhtml` available helps to achieve this.
- <https://textonly.website/> - my site got removed (I guess because it has a logo and this makes it not text-only...)
There used to be also a 10 KB club and per its rules my site would have qualified except for the requirement to be featured on HN or otherwise be a “noteworthy site” if I recall correctly. However, 10KB club seems to be offline for some time already...
In general the issue with these kinds of pages is mostly that they only check _one_ page (typically the homepage but sometimes I see people submit a special “reduced version” of their homepage, too...). Of course if _all_ pages were to be relevant I think even my (pretty miminmalist) page wouldn't qualify because some pages have high-resolution images I guess...
The signature function of the German ID card (“neuer Personalausweis”).
Its 2025 and we still haven't solved secure online identification and we are still not using end-to-end encryption for e-mail, most e-mail is not even signed.
Interaction with state agencies is still mostly via paper-based mail. The only successfully deployed online offer of the german state administration seems to be the online portal for tax filings “elster.de”.
The use of a private key on the national ID card would have been able to provide all this and more using standard protocols.
At least for identification, there is an expensive effort to re-design something similar in a smartphone-centric way and with less security and not based on standard approaches called “EUDI wallets”.
For encrypted communication the agreed-on standard seems to be “log in to our portal with HTTPS and use our proprietary interfaces to send and receive messages”...
Why did it die: Too expensive (~30€/year for certificate, >100€ for reader one time) and too complicated to use. Not enough positve PR. Acceptance at state-provided sites was added too late. In modern times, everything must be done with the smartphone, handling of physical cards is considered backwards hence this is probably not going to come back...
Edit: Anothther simiarly advanced technoloy that also seems to have been replaced by inferiror substitute smartphone: HBCI banking (a standard...) using your actual bank card + reader device to authenticate transactions... replaced by proprietary app on proprietary smartphone OS...
Some countries turned it into a part of their national ID system. Has worked great for the past 15 years. You can get a card reader for less than 20€. Works under any OS really. I can't remember the last time I got physical mail that wasn't some item I ordered.
S/MIME died because it is in many ways worse than CDOC and ASiC-E containers over email. People are reviving such approaches with EIDAS2 and from that ERDS (Electronic Registered Delivery Service). But there are no EU-wide implementations as of yet.
Those app-based approaches have also appeared, because well, they don't require a card reader. Though I'd rather see something NFC-based with a physical card. I personally find phone vendors' HSMs (and their equivalents) haven't seen enough scrutiny. Plus the apps are proprietary.
The demand is definitely there, but I predict it'll take at least a decade for the rest of the EU to catching up to Estonia, Finland and a few others. Just 25 years later.
I have a few old PCs (towers) here which don't support amd64 mostly Pentium 4-based.
They all still have DVD reader drives and are nice for ripping CDs. Despite the fact that the drives are nearing 20 years of age (machines are from ~2005) they still perform better than most “new” external drives. Of course one could also move the drives to a newer machine but many of them use the IDE connector which is not commonly found on modern systems. Also, modern cases typically don't account for (multiple) 5.25" drives.
The other use case is to flash microcontrollers. When fiddeling around with electronics there is always a risk of a short circuit or other error that could in worst case kill the attached PC's mainboard. I feel much safer attaching my self-built electronics to an old machine than to my amd64 workstation.
Due to their age, I think the old machines may not live much longer -- I fear not even 10 more years, some of my old 32-bit laptops have already failed. Hence even for me it does not make sense to try keeping up the software support. Maybe I switch them to a BSD or other Linux distribution if they live long enough but for now the machines run OK with Debian Bookworm (newly oldstable), too.
