[sf-lug] SF-LUG December 2025 Mtg

[Rick Moen]

Quoting aaronco36 (aaronco36 at sdf.org):

> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> * virtual remains:
> https://meet.jit.si/sf-lug.org
> Browser: one will need sufficiently recent version of, e.g.
> Chromium, Chrome, or possibly Firefox - in any case one that well
> supports WebRTC.
> Dial-in (audio alternative or audio only): +1.512.647.1431
> PIN: 524 338 639#
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> OTOH, Rick Moen <rick at linuxmafia.com> still has his highly relevant
> comments available for review within his June 2024 posting [4] on the
> actual Jitsi Meet "requirements".

Yeah, about that:

My point over a year ago was that SF-LUG's boilerplate text about Jitsi
Meet requirements was inaccurate and (the bigger problem) discourages
newcomers by incorrectly suggesting it's a software obstacle course.

Here we are 18 months later, and SF-LUG's boilerplate about Jitsi Meet
requirements is still inaccurate and still discourages newcomers by
incorrectly suggesting it's a software obstacle course.  You cannot fix 
a discouragingly and pointlessly overcomplicated and inaccurate "how to
participate" recipe by leaving that recipe intact and appending "But
you should also read this other thing at this provided URL."

That was unclear on the problem.

Whoever wrote that text (and I think I can guess who) didn't know that
since about 2015 all graphical browser engines in common use support
WebRTC and thus Jitsi Meet.  That error was understandable, but we 
should learn, shouldn't we?  The technical underpinnings required are
barely more than JavaScript + common A/V codecs.  In 2025, the only
graphical Web browsers that _cannot_ do that are either unspeakably
ancient and unmaintained or are specialty browsers that only a very
technical eccentric would run (like maybe Dillo or NetSurf).

Look at what does WebRTC:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WebRTC#Support  
Seriously, any newcomer in 2025 still running MSIE 8.x on WinXP is an
unlikely edge-case.

Saying "any reasonably modern graphical Web browser" would be a huge 
improvement.