3 ms·

I feel like someone stopping maintenance of a private server is way more likely than the most popular chat client at the time shutting down eventually. In your

I feel like someone stopping maintenance of a private server is way more likely than the most popular chat client at the time shutting down eventually. In your mind, who in 2017 was still using AIM, blissfully unaware of the shutdown, only to be met with an error page and the loss of their friends forever? I'm sure most people are like me... over a decade ago, my AIM friends mostly migrated to text messages (and a few to FB Messenger), and any impending doom of those two protocols will be long-preceded by us having already gone somewhere else.

berkes 6y ago
> like someone stopping maintenance of a private server is way more likely But the chance that thousands of someones all stop maintainance of their private servers (at the same time) is way more unlikely.
- robjan 6y ago
  It's still inconvenient. The inconvenience ranges from slightly annoying to "I have lost all my messages and now have to find all of my friends/family/colleagues contact details again somehow".
garbagetime 6y ago
I think GP was suggesting each person runs their own computer. So, >someone stopping maintenance of a private server Would only mean that that specific person was unreachable. Everyone else could carry on like nothing had happened.
jlkuester7 6y ago
> I feel like someone stopping maintenance of a private server is way more likely than the most popular chat client at the time shutting down eventually. I have been hosting my own Matrix homeserver and my 4+ years of service life seems to be longer than 80% of Google services... :) (Admittedly I am just joking with this apples-to-oranges comparison, but sometimes it sure does feel like major corporations are trending towards shorter and shorter service lifetimes for their offerings... and this is coming from someone who rode the Google+ train all the way to the last station!)
sp332 6y ago
But the server would be less likely to shut down while there are poeple actively invested in it. With a smaller group, the maintainers can be held more accountable.

berkes 6y ago

> like someone stopping maintenance of a private server is way more likely But the chance that thousands of someones all stop maintainance of their private servers (at the same time) is way more unlikely.

robjan 6y ago
It's still inconvenient. The inconvenience ranges from slightly annoying to "I have lost all my messages and now have to find all of my friends/family/colleagues contact details again somehow".

garbagetime 6y ago

I think GP was suggesting each person runs their own computer. So, >someone stopping maintenance of a private server Would only mean that that specific person was unreachable. Everyone else could carry on like nothing had happened.

jlkuester7 6y ago

> I feel like someone stopping maintenance of a private server is way more likely than the most popular chat client at the time shutting down eventually. I have been hosting my own Matrix homeserver and my 4+ years of service life seems to be longer than 80% of Google services... :) (Admittedly I am just joking with this apples-to-oranges comparison, but sometimes it sure does feel like major corporations are trending towards shorter and shorter service lifetimes for their offerings... and this is coming from someone who rode the Google+ train all the way to the last station!)

sp332 6y ago

But the server would be less likely to shut down while there are poeple actively invested in it. With a smaller group, the maintainers can be held more accountable.