6 ms·

The more proprietary chat platforms that arise, the more I want to see Matrix[1] / Riot[2] succeed. Communication networks should not be corporate controlled w

The more proprietary chat platforms that arise, the more I want to see Matrix[1] / Riot[2] succeed. Communication networks should not be corporate controlled walled gardens. [1]: https://matrix.org https://matrix.org [2]: https://matrix.org/docs/projects/client/riot-ios.html https://matrix.org/docs/projects/client/riot-ios.html https://matrix.org/docs/projects/client/riot-android.html https://matrix.org/docs/projects/client/riot-android.html

Veratyr 10y ago
I'm just waiting for Matrix to get E2E going... For now, XMPP works well enough.
- jrv 10y ago
  E2E is already activated in Riot web and will come to mobile in a month or so (at least according to what Matthew said in the Matrix room on Matrix).
- Shank 10y ago
  Yep, same! I'll run my own homeserver for me and my friends when E2E kicks off.
- corney91 10y ago
  To be honest, I don't even think E2E is as important in a distributed system. If you're worried about who can see your messages, you can just set up your own server and force server-to-server and client-to-server encryption.
  - dublinben 10y ago
    You shouldn't have to set up your own server to have secure communication. It should be the default for all users.
    - mxuribe 10y ago
      Right now, yes, agreed that to "set up your own server" is not for the casual user...but eventually setting up a server should be as a straight-forward affair - not unlike installing an app from an app store/marketplace. Also, remember that there was a time when casual users would go through the set up of local/desktop clients in order to simply read/write email - e.g. outlook express, thunderbird, apple's mail app, etc. Whether we call it setting up a server, or installing/setting up an app., eventually it won't make much difference.
  - Arathorn 10y ago
    Actually, E2E does end up being really important in Matrix because room history gets synchronised across all the participating users in a room. So assuming you have /any/ non-local users in the room, they'll end up storing a copy of the conversation in plaintext-equivalent on their servers unless you have E2E, which rapidly becomes non-desirable for any private rooms given you don't want to have to trust everyone's sysadmins. And given 'run your own server' is half the joy of Matrix, we don't want to tell people to turn off federation if they want security! This is why we've made a real effort with Olm & Megolm (http://matrix.org/git/olm/about/ http://matrix.org/git/olm/about/) in Matrix to ensure that E2E is there in the baseline, and will be turned on by default for all private rooms. (disclaimer: I work on Matrix)
amelius 10y ago
I'm surprised that email is not corporate controlled yet. What did email do right that chat did wrong? Afaik, there was once a good standard for chat.
- LeoPanthera 10y ago
  > I'm surprised that email is not corporate controlled yet. With the vast majority of email users using a tiny number of email providers, it effectively is. If Gmail decides that your personal mail server is sending spam, it becomes effectively useless.
  - JshWright 10y ago
    Yeah, but there is no denying that email "federation" works very well (which makes sense, and it was pretty much the only major design goal). The lack of easy federation is why there are millions of chat 'bubbles' out there.
    - yoz-y 10y ago
      Also, chat ecosystems are somewhat federated on your device. Notifications and grouping (on iOS) and contacts integration (on Android and Windows) make it quite easy to run multiple chat clients at the same time so people do not bother. The one big problem is group conversations, however.
      - soylentcola 10y ago
        Group conversation starts to suck when you have to fall back to SMS. Just from personal use, IM-type services handle it fine but they're not always cross platform. Friends on iPhones use the iOS IM app but when they add someone to a group chat who isn't on iOS, they get the messages as attachments to MMS. Android's Messenger app handles this OK at the moment but it didn't always. And when SMS/MMS was integrated into Hangouts, it never handled it well. Hangouts works fine for groups messages and at least you can install that on iOS but not everyone will want to use something else when they already use iMessage. Allo works but unless you use Allo, you get SMS/MMS from some random new number. Basically, from what I gather, good group conversation support is a function of IP-based IM services and SMS/MMS was never really meant to handle that without workarounds and hacks. But SMS/MMS are a standard that any mobile device can handle whereas all the third party services and apps require either a particular OS or at least another messaging app to be installed. Really would've loved to see a standard protocol with proper encryption and adoption by all major platforms but that doesn't seem to work for the Apples/Googles/Facebooks/etc of the world who would rather use Messaging as a way to keep you on their platform. Why would you leave when it would mean you can't keep those group chats you have with friends, family, and coworkers you've been having for all this time?
jug 10y ago
It's taken surprisingly long for an open network like this to become common! You'd think that would be the only concept with longevity and "punch", due to the very nature of communications: unwalled always wins. I mean, that's why e-mail is still used. I also hope we'll get rid of these silly games by Google and others in the future.
JustSomeNobody 10y ago
I definitely want an open service to succeed. I think one big problem is with the major players, non-techies know they just work (more or less) and people will use them so there's not much hassle. Even among techies, there's chat fatigue now. That being said, I have this nagging idea in my head that the more chat apps that get thrown at people, the easier it may be for an open service to prevail.
- brightball 10y ago
  I'd tend to agree with you. With a diffusion of options you're essentially going to see the natural rise of 2 corporate competitors and 1 alternative option that many people support out of principle. It's a mind share pattern that seems to exist in many places: Hipchat, Slack, Matrix Windows, OSX, Ubuntu Linux Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians .NET, Java, Open Source Dynamic options -> Ruby/Python/Javascript/PHP/Elixir/Perl
  - Arathorn 10y ago
    It's worth noting that sometimes the alternative option wins... e.g. once upon a time on the web, the 2 corporate competitors were Microsoft IIS and Netscape Enterprise Server... and 'underdog' Apache :)

Veratyr 10y ago

I'm just waiting for Matrix to get E2E going... For now, XMPP works well enough.

jrv 10y ago
E2E is already activated in Riot web and will come to mobile in a month or so (at least according to what Matthew said in the Matrix room on Matrix).
Shank 10y ago
Yep, same! I'll run my own homeserver for me and my friends when E2E kicks off.
corney91 10y ago
To be honest, I don't even think E2E is as important in a distributed system. If you're worried about who can see your messages, you can just set up your own server and force server-to-server and client-to-server encryption.
- dublinben 10y ago
  You shouldn't have to set up your own server to have secure communication. It should be the default for all users.
  - mxuribe 10y ago
    Right now, yes, agreed that to "set up your own server" is not for the casual user...but eventually setting up a server should be as a straight-forward affair - not unlike installing an app from an app store/marketplace. Also, remember that there was a time when casual users would go through the set up of local/desktop clients in order to simply read/write email - e.g. outlook express, thunderbird, apple's mail app, etc. Whether we call it setting up a server, or installing/setting up an app., eventually it won't make much difference.
- Arathorn 10y ago
  Actually, E2E does end up being really important in Matrix because room history gets synchronised across all the participating users in a room. So assuming you have /any/ non-local users in the room, they'll end up storing a copy of the conversation in plaintext-equivalent on their servers unless you have E2E, which rapidly becomes non-desirable for any private rooms given you don't want to have to trust everyone's sysadmins. And given 'run your own server' is half the joy of Matrix, we don't want to tell people to turn off federation if they want security! This is why we've made a real effort with Olm & Megolm (http://matrix.org/git/olm/about/ http://matrix.org/git/olm/about/) in Matrix to ensure that E2E is there in the baseline, and will be turned on by default for all private rooms. (disclaimer: I work on Matrix)

amelius 10y ago

I'm surprised that email is not corporate controlled yet. What did email do right that chat did wrong? Afaik, there was once a good standard for chat.

LeoPanthera 10y ago
> I'm surprised that email is not corporate controlled yet. With the vast majority of email users using a tiny number of email providers, it effectively is. If Gmail decides that your personal mail server is sending spam, it becomes effectively useless.
- JshWright 10y ago
  Yeah, but there is no denying that email "federation" works very well (which makes sense, and it was pretty much the only major design goal). The lack of easy federation is why there are millions of chat 'bubbles' out there.
  - yoz-y 10y ago
    Also, chat ecosystems are somewhat federated on your device. Notifications and grouping (on iOS) and contacts integration (on Android and Windows) make it quite easy to run multiple chat clients at the same time so people do not bother. The one big problem is group conversations, however.
    - soylentcola 10y ago
      Group conversation starts to suck when you have to fall back to SMS. Just from personal use, IM-type services handle it fine but they're not always cross platform. Friends on iPhones use the iOS IM app but when they add someone to a group chat who isn't on iOS, they get the messages as attachments to MMS. Android's Messenger app handles this OK at the moment but it didn't always. And when SMS/MMS was integrated into Hangouts, it never handled it well. Hangouts works fine for groups messages and at least you can install that on iOS but not everyone will want to use something else when they already use iMessage. Allo works but unless you use Allo, you get SMS/MMS from some random new number. Basically, from what I gather, good group conversation support is a function of IP-based IM services and SMS/MMS was never really meant to handle that without workarounds and hacks. But SMS/MMS are a standard that any mobile device can handle whereas all the third party services and apps require either a particular OS or at least another messaging app to be installed. Really would've loved to see a standard protocol with proper encryption and adoption by all major platforms but that doesn't seem to work for the Apples/Googles/Facebooks/etc of the world who would rather use Messaging as a way to keep you on their platform. Why would you leave when it would mean you can't keep those group chats you have with friends, family, and coworkers you've been having for all this time?

jug 10y ago

It's taken surprisingly long for an open network like this to become common! You'd think that would be the only concept with longevity and "punch", due to the very nature of communications: unwalled always wins. I mean, that's why e-mail is still used. I also hope we'll get rid of these silly games by Google and others in the future.

JustSomeNobody 10y ago

I definitely want an open service to succeed. I think one big problem is with the major players, non-techies know they just work (more or less) and people will use them so there's not much hassle. Even among techies, there's chat fatigue now. That being said, I have this nagging idea in my head that the more chat apps that get thrown at people, the easier it may be for an open service to prevail.

brightball 10y ago
I'd tend to agree with you. With a diffusion of options you're essentially going to see the natural rise of 2 corporate competitors and 1 alternative option that many people support out of principle. It's a mind share pattern that seems to exist in many places: Hipchat, Slack, Matrix Windows, OSX, Ubuntu Linux Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians .NET, Java, Open Source Dynamic options -> Ruby/Python/Javascript/PHP/Elixir/Perl
- Arathorn 10y ago
  It's worth noting that sometimes the alternative option wins... e.g. once upon a time on the web, the 2 corporate competitors were Microsoft IIS and Netscape Enterprise Server... and 'underdog' Apache :)