11 ms·
I disagree, IRC is as simple as it gets. This might discourage some people from joining.
by bsagdiyev 7y ago
I disagree, IRC is as simple as it gets. This might discourage some people from joining.
- dTal 7y agoI love IRC but it is clearly not "as simple as it gets". Every non-technical person I've tried to introduce it to glazes over by the second or third /command, if they even get past "you need to pick an IRC network". Meanwhile they're all happily chatting away on WhatsApp.
- bluedino 7y agoSome people consider vi a simple editor...
- farisjarrah 7y agoDoes simple have to equal easy? An abacus is very simple, but its not easy to do advanced mathematics on it without prior training.
- kstrauser 7y ago> Does simple have to equal easy? laughs in Simple Mail Transfer Protocol
- raverbashing 7y agolaughs even harder in lightweight directory access protocol
- falcolas 7y agoscreams and runs away
- bashinator 7y agoAny protocol with the words "lightweight" or "simple" in the name, is not. Looking at you, SNMP.
- kstrauser 7y agoThe protocols themselves are lightweight or simple, but using them may not be. Imagine that your protocol for choosing dinner with your SO is: You: What would you like: Them: I don't care. There, simple! Getting some useful information out of that is an exercise left for the reader.
- bashinator 7y agoWonderful analogy - thank you for that.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- ci5er 7y agoWell, it used to be. Before they discovered headers...
- Barrin92 7y agoif we're talking about it in the context of widespread user adoption then yes. At least it's a large part of it. It's not really helpful when people try to describe IRC as easy simply because it resembles text based paradigms that developers are familiar with.
- x3haloed 7y agoI think the missing subtlety here is simple design vs. simple to use or simple to learn. Vim is very simple in design, but not at all simple to learn.
- imron 7y agoMany people (myself included) consider vi to be a powerful editor. I've not heard many who would call it simple though.
- fernandotakai 7y agoyup. it's extremely powerful, super customizable (when it comes to vim/neovim), but simple? never. i would never recommend vim to a someone that is just beginning when vscode is right there.
- boomlinde 7y agoI think the point is that there is a sense in which you can say that something is simple that pertains to complexity rather than ease of use. Vim is arguably simple in neither of these senses, but most Vi clones are much less complex than Vim or NeoVim.
- Aengeuad 7y agoIs somebody that is taking the time to learn Rust really going to struggle with a handful of commands though? Day to day I never need more than /join, /part, /msg, or the occasional /quit, and I'm using a terminal based client, some phone/web clients I've used don't require any commands.
- detaro 7y agoMozilla's chat is not just for developers.
- Aengeuad 7y agoNor is IRC, which is what prompted me to reply. I made a mistake though, nobody else in the comment chain was talking about Rust or developers. I had read a comment in another part of the thread which linked to Mozilla's forums [0] which mentioned more people in the developers channels on the Matrix instance, which I had mistakenly assumed was part of this comment chain, hence the question relating to developers. [0] https://discourse.mozilla.org/t/synchronous-messaging-at-mozilla-were-live/54424 https://discourse.mozilla.org/t/synchronous-messaging-at-moz... >The number of participants in our primary development channels has already exceeded their counterparts on IRC at their most active [...]
- bitwize 7y agoProfessional developers mostly use Macs these days, and won't touch anything that doesn't have a nice UI that does exactly what they expect. Anything that looks too textual or "computer-code-y" that's not related to what they're working on, they will stay away from. Case in point: virtually no one uses Emacs. Even Vim is diminishing; most devs now use Visual Studio Code.
- dvdgsng 7y ago> Professional developers mostly use Macs these days > most devs now use Visual Studio Code. You seem to live in some other world than I ...
- 7y ago
- zmix 7y agoFrom the menu: Favorites -> irc.mozilla.org connecting to irc.mozilla.org... /join #channel (or have it set up to auto-join a named channels) bla bla bla /part (or simply just (Q)uit from the menu) If you did not (Q)uit from the menu yet, either do it or /quit If you preset some autoconnects and autojoins, there is no need to know any of the commands.
- cptskippy 7y agoBut now I have to know presets, and if my presets are lost also commands.
- zmix 7y agoJust try a modern graphical IRC client. It's all menu/GUI driven. You have a list, often preset with all the IRC servers, worldwide. Just choose the one you want and add it to "Favorites". There, list all channels, search the ones, that cover your topic (via text input box) and add them to "Autojoins" or "Favorites". The preset gets created automatically, either globally or per network. In other lingo, it's called: an application's preferences.
- 6510 7y agoyou had to be registered
- zmix 7y agoNo need to register on many IRC networks. I do not need to be registered on Freenode (though, I am).
- blotter_paper 7y agohttps://www.infoq.com/presentations/Simple-Made-Easy/ https://www.infoq.com/presentations/Simple-Made-Easy/ Hickley argues that simple != easy. "Easy" is inherently subjective, and only tells us how easy something is for the actor attempting that thing; if you know more about a domain, things related to that domain become easier. If you knew how to tie knot A and I knew how to tie knot B, we would both find our respective knots easier. "Simple" is more objective, insofar as anything can be. We could judge the complexity of knots in a rope based on how many times the rope turns over on itself, and that complexity would not be dependant on your knowledge of particular knots. In principle we should be able to agree on which knot is more complex even if we still have an easier time tying the ones we are familiar with. Of course you can mount an argument that simple is used as a synonym of easy, because it often is, but I like the idea of simple being the opposite of "complex" and "complex" meaning "many-folded" rather than "difficult."
- Ajedi32 7y agoFair point, but in this case it's really easy that users want, not necessarily "simple". Going back to the points made earlier in this thread, IRC is a lot simpler than WhatsApp, but WhatsApp has a much larger user base because it's easier to use.
- dTal 7y agoPerhaps, but it's a complete sidetrack. In the context of this discussion, "simple" was indeed being used as a shorthand for "accessible": > Finally, this is going to be more accessible to more users to Mozilla since now they are using Matrix. > I disagree, IRC is as simple as it gets. This might discourage some people from joining.
- aquova 7y agoIRC is as simple as it gets for people who are familiar with IRC. New users expect certain UI features for chat apps anymore, and people able to connect via a browser without needing to worry about /commands is the way the world works these days.
- bsagdiyev 7y agoThat is a client/software problem, not a problem that needs to be replaced with complicated solutions. You're fixing the wrong problem and then shitting on the previous implementation without taking the effort to resolve the issues there. Not to mention IRC has plenty of web UI clients that make usage simple, so that point itself is moot.
- st3fan 7y agoIt is actually a people problem. The move away from IRC has a lot to do with abuse and harassment.
- Klonoar 7y agoThis is simply false, as proven by the numerous clients that have tried and failed to build on top of IRC. Every single thread about this kind of stuff has an IRC devote crawl out of the woodwork. I get it: I grew up on IRC as well. You gotta accept what people (and organizations, like Mozilla, who clearly outlined their reasoning publicly before doing this) need.
- JoshTriplett 7y ago> That is a client/software problem How, with existing IRC networks, and without requiring each user to have their own server somewhere or pay for a third-party service, do you get persistent history and the ability to message people who aren't currently online? That's table-stakes for chat services; there are many more things where that comes from, but that by itself is enough reason.
- detaro 7y agoBy hosting a web client for free? Just like Mozilla contracts the Matrix folks (at least I think Modular.im is closely connected to core devs) to host a web matrix client at https://chat.mozilla.org/ https://chat.mozilla.org/. Or offer a full hosted bouncer a la IRCCloud (Although their default pricing wouldn't be tenable for this)
- cpeterso 7y agoMozilla's Matrix numbers disagree. Riot/Matrix is much more accessible than IRC. "The number of participants in our primary development channels [on Matrix] has already exceeded their counterparts on IRC at their most active, and there’s no sign that’s slowing down." https://discourse.mozilla.org/t/synchronous-messaging-at-mozilla-were-live/54424 https://discourse.mozilla.org/t/synchronous-messaging-at-moz...
- bsagdiyev 7y agoKeeping in mind that generally technical people will join this server and may have a vested interest in the move from IRC? The issue around IRC is not a problem that can't be solved and really has been solved with the Web UI clients, for an every day user, to clients that make it simple otherwise. See my other comment in this thread if you disagree but this is making something unnecessarily complicated because... reasons?
- buzzkillington 7y agoThe bureaucracy expanded to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy.
- AlexMax 7y ago> Keeping in mind that generally technical people will join this server and may have a vested interest in the move from IRC? I'm not sure what the implication is here. > The issue around IRC is not a problem that can't be solved and really has been solved with the Web UI clients, for an every day user, to clients that make it simple otherwise. The issues surrounding IRC are partly because of inconsistent client implementation of features, but I think an even bigger problem is the inconsistent feature set of servers, which end-users have no control over. Sometimes it's because the server simply hasn't implemented a particular feature, other times it's because there is no feature - and if you're lucky, you'll even be told condescendingly that you don't actually need that feature in the first place. And of course, there's also the stuff that is implemented, but only accessible through bot interfaces that are incompatible between servers. Or the problems that are technically possible but require using a bouncer, and even still, that has inconvenient warts like having to grep through logs to search for stuff that isn't in your backlog, and the seemingly impossible-to-solve issue of persisting private messages across reconnects in a way that's useful in all situations. In any case, Mozilla has mentioned their intent to make their Matrix server accessible from an IRC bridge in the future, so it really does seem like the best of both worlds - giving Matrix uses the advantages of the platform like editing chats and easy offline channel history, while allowing IRC users to continue using their comfy client. Personally, for me, it's the other way around - Matrix has almost completely supplanted the use of my self-hosted IRC bouncer, and I'm looking forward to the day when I can shut it off for good.
- baq 7y agotechnically simple, yes. UX simple, duuude.
- beatgammit 7y agoWhat's wrong with the UX? If you don't like the client you're using, pick another, some are quite nice looking and don't require memorizing any / commands.
- baq 7y ago> If you don't like the client you're using my point starts here... > pick another ...continues further... > some are quite nice looking and don't require memorizing any / commands ...but doesn't end here. how do I paste a screenshot or a photo or an animated cat video meme into an irc conversation? you might start getting somewhere if you've given me iMessage for IRC preinstalled on iOS. maybe.
- masklinn 7y ago> This might discourage some people from joining. It will however encourage way more people.
- shmerl 7y agoI wouldn't say IRC is easy to use (or easier than Matrix at least). I'd prefer Matrix to IRC any time.
- rvz 7y agoIRC just isn't user-friendly to most internet users these days and its arcane prehistoric appearance is enough to spook them off to use something easier. IRC still suffers from usability issues which WhatsApp, Slack, Discord and Telegram have already solved. However they are closed-source platforms, so Matrix is the best alternative for a truly free, open-source and more accessible platform for the general user to communicate from which should be IRCs successor.
- progval 7y ago> its arcane prehistoric appearance IRC is a protocol, it doesn't have an appearance. And IRC clients can have very "modern" looks. See for example: https://www.irccloud.com/ https://www.irccloud.com/ or https://quasseldroid.info/ https://quasseldroid.info/ > Matrix is the best alternative for a truly free, open-source While Matrix is certainly more free and open source than the other ones, Matrix clients depend on a non-free bit to work properly, and they don't plan on fixing that: https://github.com/vector-im/riot-web/issues/7757 https://github.com/vector-im/riot-web/issues/7757
- Arathorn 7y ago> While Matrix is certainly more free and open source than the other ones, Matrix clients depend on a non-free bit to work properly This is FUD. a) Integration Managers are optional, and in no way required to "work properly". b) There's a great FOSS integration manager over at https://dimension.t2bot.io/ https://dimension.t2bot.io/ if you don't want to use the default one.
- progval 7y ago> a) Integration Managers are optional, and in no way required to "work properly". Do you have a link to a description of what integration managers do exactly? > b) There's a great FOSS integration manager over at https://dimension.t2bot.io/ https://dimension.t2bot.io/ if you don't want to use the default one. Noted, thanks. My search results for "Matrix integration server" are flooded with irrelevant results
- Yoric 7y agoThat's not my experience as a mentor (over IRC, Matrix and other communication channels). The experience getting started with Matrix removes one pointless barrier.
- throaway1990 7y agoYup IRC is a simple and robust technology with minimal cruft.
- afiori 7y agoalso an hammer is simple, this does not extend to being useful for your job. IRC is quirky and requires either a mentor to teach you the quirks or some study. this is not a deal breaker, as also email is in a similar situation and it works somehow there.
- forgotmypw16 7y agoI followed one of the links, tried to register (which IRC does not require) and was declined, "registration disabled". About the experience I expected, tbh. I'll stick with IRC. Given up on Mozilla long ago.
- lub 7y agoYou have to use the Mozilla SSO and use one of the login options there. Removing the registration link is an open issue.
- monkey26 7y agoIt’s as simple as it gets like C is simple. True for some of us, but not for most.
- Polylactic_acid 7y agoThe only way IRC could be considered simple is if you are talking about the entire stack without any abstractions. You can technically open a connection to an irc server with NC and just type the IRC protocol by hand. You can't do that with Matrix because it sits on top of HTTP. But this is an absolutely insane way to think about software.
- rishav_sharan 7y agoFor a lot of us luddites, IRC is what stops us from joining realtime communities. I'd rather take gitter, discord or even slack anyday
- Polylactic_acid 7y agoA telegraph is infinitely more simple than IRC. Lets see how many people you can communicate with if you use that for a communication platform.