7 ms·
> Most people can't program and are comfortable with Mac/Windows. Yeah, being comfortable is not the point. The point is being free. > No one here is shacklin
by rglullis 6y ago
> Most people can't program and are comfortable with Mac/Windows.
Yeah, being comfortable is not the point. The point is being free.
> No one here is shackling you to Signal.
No one forced me to use WhatsApp. I still use it and still have on my phone. I did manage to introduce some people to Matrix, setup their accounts and install their clients when they wanted to talk to me, but there is a whole lot more that I am just not close enough and that I know won't bother to switch just because I am asking them to.
If people ask me, I'd do the best case I can to get them to Matrix (or XMPP. I don't care as long as it is open and free) and I will help them whenever possible to switch away from centralized systems.
> I, too, would like to see a decentralized, federated protocol take off.
If you truly want to see a federated alternative grow, you have to help it. It's not going to happen if we just stand passively waiting for some big benefactor to show up and decide they don't want to control this space. Every big company will try to control this space and they will always have more resources and will use the advantages that centralized services (faster development, economies of scale) gives them.
Network effects matter. There is no better time to help people switch to a more free option than now with this massive WhatsApp diaspora. If people settle for Signal, it would be better than WhatsApp but it would still be a massive wasted opportunity. This is why I am arguing now so strongly.
(Lastly, do you know one software that I am somewhat forced to use? Slack. Do you know what can replace Slack with just a wee bit of training? Matrix. Two birds, one stone)
> Signal is no progress at all.
In the terms of freedom: no, it is not. The server is supposedly open source, yet the last commit in their repository is from April. If someone decided to fork Signal to run their own server, would they get a current version? Would existing clients be able to use the different server?
The answer is possibly, maybe it will require a lot of work on the people doing the fork. Which is fine from the legal perspective, but really far from the mark from Open Source ethics.
- faitswulff 6y ago> you have to help it It's true that some element of grassroots activism will affect outcomes, but I think marketing, longevity, and UX make a larger difference. Either way, getting a federated alternative up to speed in UX or forking Signal will require a lot of work.
- rglullis 6y agoDisagree on the last sentence. You simply can not compare the amount of work that will be required (collectively and individually) in either outcome. Improvements to Matrix are being made, and both Element and the Matrix foundation are supportive of further developments and getting more people onboard. Signal is actively working to get forks to do extra leg-work.
- faitswulff 6y agoAgree to disagree then.
- rglullis 6y agoPlease take a look at https://drewdevault.com/2018/08/08/Signal.html https://drewdevault.com/2018/08/08/Signal.html and tell me if you continue to believe that forking/replicating Signal to make it decentralized would be the same amount of work as improving the UX of a Matrix client.
- faitswulff 6y agoI read it, but I suspect that am fundamentally uninterested in (or not as interested in) the values that you share with the blog author. And you haven't ceded an inch on "centralized services are useless" so I have no motivation to continue this conversation.
- rglullis 6y agoSorry, I have been in many different threads with different people and I don't think ever said "centralized services are useless", have I? What you will usually read from me is that centralized services restrict our freedom, concentrate too much power in one single entity and are not worth the convenience.
- faitswulff 6y ago