12 ms·

How is this better than Matrix? Freenode had posterity going for it. What does a brand new IRC network in 2021 have to offer than Matrix does not?

Dobbs 5y ago
> posterity This is what it has going for it. It is meant to be a drop-in(ish) replacement for freenode. All the same clients, all the same protocols, all the same channels (in theory).
- cheph 5y ago
  > It is meant to be a drop-in(ish) replacement for freenode A drop in replacement for a place that was run into the ground by the people who now will run the drop in replacement. Good joke. Everybody laugh. Roll on snare drum. Curtains. If the sarcasm is missed, there is nothing at all funny about this abomination. I would much rather trust Andrew Lee than this bunch.
prepend 5y ago
I think protocols are better than systems. Since matrix isn’t an RFC (yet?), I think there’s still value in using an open protocol over a particular system or project. I think an open source project is more scalable and reusable than a proprietary one, but if the goal is long term communication among diverse users, then using a protocol is good.
- SamWhited 5y ago
  This is one of the big issues with Matrix that doesn't get talked about enough: it's not managed by a real standards body. It was previously run by a company who kept trying to monetize the IP, then it was run by a few people who split off that company (and still kept trying to figure out how to monetize it and pay themselves a wage with it). I'm not against the devs being able to pay themselves, that's great, but the specs themselves shouldn't be run that way. Existing standards bodies have more experience, more legal protections for the users, and are just generally better at developing standards.
  - callahad 5y ago
    > Existing standards bodies [...] are just generally better at developing standards. Speaking in a strictly personal capacity, I don't think that point can be taken for granted. The W3C's missteps with HTML5, and WHATWG's success, is a particularly notable failing of a dedicated standards body. The Rust programming language is also developed and codified outside of a traditional standards organization.
    - SamWhited 5y ago
      That's fair; I don't mean to suggest that all standards bodies are perfect all the time, or that they've never made mistakes :) just that it's better than making up a foundation spinoff from a company that doesn't have any experience and will re-invent the wheel yet again instead of submitting the standard to one of the existing standards bodies.
      - joepie91_ 5y ago
        Matrix as a protocol is still in active development. Unlike "low-level" protocols such as HTTP, the Matrix protocol is much closer to end-user experience and so it must be able to move relatively quickly to remain competitive with proprietary systems. This generally does not fit into the process of standards bodies like the IETF very well. There's a reason why eg. the WHATWG exists, basically.
        SamWhited 5y ago
        Sure, it doesn't have to be the IETF, that was just an example. But even they tend to do this well (by eg. spinning off a smaller more agile standards body to keep up with building extensions more rapidly). Also, rapid development has its own set of problems as we've seen with XMPP (where no two clients support the same set of features because new ones are being developed to keep up with various proprietary things all the time). Anyways, point is, don't reinvent the wheel, I'm sure one of the standard bodies could have been a good fit if we needed this at all, but Matrix definitely isn't a good fit for this Freenode replacement and this is one of the reasons why (the other is that Freenode works just fine and the point is that this is a drop in replacement).
- roblabla 5y ago
  Matrix is an open protocol[0]. It's not managed by the IETF, but it has an open process for submitting changes. See the Spec Change Proposal instructions[1]. [0]: https://spec.matrix.org/unstable/ https://spec.matrix.org/unstable/ [1]: https://spec.matrix.org/unstable/proposals/ https://spec.matrix.org/unstable/proposals/
  - prepend 5y ago
    I read a bit about that and I think it’s positive, but a single company controlling a standard and considering changes is not the same as a protocol.
    - roblabla 5y ago
      https://matrix.org/foundation/ https://matrix.org/foundation/ at the bottom of this page, you'll find the people who are actually in charge with accepting protocol changes (the Spec Core Team). It's true that most are part of New Vector, the for-profit company behind Element and Matrix, but Alexey Rusakov is not as far as I could tell. So there is at least one non-New Vector voice. It honestly feels pretty likely that this is just a maturity thing - as more products are built around Matrix, the Spec Core team will likely become more diverse.
      - joepie91_ 5y ago
        As I understand it, there's actually an explicit desire for more non-NV people to become involved with the SCT. There just aren't very many other organizations to fund it yet - SCT members need to eat too.
        Arathorn 5y ago
        The situation here is that when we set up the SCT we deliberately picked a 50/50 mix of core Matrix team and community members. What we didn't anticipate is that the community members then were sufficiently sucked into Matrix that they were prepared to work on it fulltime, and a bunch joined Element as the only viable way to do so. Given the team is functioning pretty well and we're improving Matrix, it feels nuts to penalise people based on who they work for, hence the current blend.
- rdpintqogeogsaa 5y ago
  To be fair, IRC hasn't had an accurate RFC in decades. https://modern.ircdocs.horse/ https://modern.ircdocs.horse/ is the closest to accurate client<->server protocol documentation, but is fully outside the IETF process.
delfinom 5y ago
The ability to google for it and not just end up with 40000000 pages of movie results?
- viraptor 5y ago
  I checked. "Matrix chat" does not have a single movie reference in the first 3 pages of results. It's really not a problem.
  - Biganon 5y ago
    If your search engine thinks you speak French, you might get results about that scene in the movie with the glitchy cat...
SamWhited 5y ago
I'm not really a fan of IRC (a federated network where some OSS projects were on their own servers or different ones would have limited the blast radius of a hostile takeover of one server like this), but Matrix is bloated and slow and the protocol makes no sense for chat (though it may have other applications); it's not a great fit for a large network with lots of people who may or may not have modern hardware. Not to mention that the servers would take a lot more resources to run on Matrix (assuming it eventually gets roughly the same size as Freenode was).
- est31 5y ago
  The implementations might be bloated (js heavy, etc), and the non bloated implementations written in C++ or Rust or so don't have the full feature set yet, but is it really the protocol to blame? In which way does the protocol make no sense for chat? IRC is extremely complicated as well and a giant pile of hacks.
  - SamWhited 5y ago
    For clients maybe not, but for servers the protocol itself is to blame, yes. A giant distributed graph database where everything has to be synced constantly means you use a ton of memory. IRC is definitely complicated, and arguably a pile of hacks, but an event based system (more or less) makes a lot more sense for chat where you want realtime communication (more or less), not to wait while you sync nodes in the graph to every place that wants them.
    - joepie91_ 5y ago
      This makes no sense. Propagating a bunch of messages doesn't suddenly use a ton of memory just because you're organizing them as a graph rather than a linear pubsub-style stream.
      - SamWhited 5y ago
        Sorry, it was a bad explanation. The point is that you have to keep a lot of past state in memory for future messages to make sense and sync properly, unlike an event based system where you (more or less) only need to perform some action when you get an event then forget about it. This is an IRC thread though, sorry I got sucked in but let's not let the Matrix CEO derail it and try to score users. The whole point is is that it didn't make sense for them to switch to matrix because it uses more resources than most IRC servers and because they are trying to be a drop in replacement, not make users sign up for new things.
phaer 5y ago
Wasn't there always the the argument of bridges whenever people tried to convince others to switch to Matrix? IMO it doesn't need to be "better", there are different requirements and preferences among users and between Matrix, IRC and Jabber, each of those ecosystems got their own set of issues.
staz 5y ago
it easier to change what server you connect to in your client, especially if all the channels you connect to move over, than to adopt a new protocol/client/ etc..
rockdoe 5y ago
Talking about Matrix...matrix.org had an IRC bridge to the Freenode network. Is there any up for libera.chat? (The bridge is unreliable, but still very handy to stay connected to old friends)
- fundamental 5y ago
  I don't think one is setup currently, though based upon some of the IRC channels I'm in it sounds like one is getting actively worked on.
  - jordemort 5y ago
    Hoping there's one soon, the only way I connect to IRC these days is through a Matrix bridge and I don't want to run one myself :)
    - Apotheos 5y ago
      Do you have your own server? How hard was it to set up?
      - jordemort 5y ago
        I run my own homeserver. It wasn't too hard to set up but it's fairly resource-intensive. I have it on a big Ryzen and barely notice it but I think it would crush something like a Raspberry Pi (especially if you tried to run it off an SD card)
rataata_jr 5y ago
Can you use Matrix from Emacs?
- mouldysammich 5y ago
  https://github.com/alphapapa/matrix-client.el https://github.com/alphapapa/matrix-client.el there is this
  - medstrom 5y ago
    There is also weechat.el, and weechat has a matrix plugin.
joepie91_ 5y ago
I'm a fan of Matrix as a project, but I don't think that "the house is on fire, we must evacuate" is the correct moment to tell people to move to a different messaging protocol and ecosystem entirely. That's a big change for a community.
ptman 5y ago
Indeed. IRC is closed federation and the server admins are in a great position of power. In an open federation like email or matrix, the power of server admins is much smaller, and this kind of takeover wouldn't happen. Or if it did happen, it would be less of a problem.
- immibis 5y ago
  This freenode thing shows they have less power than they think. If they abuse it, it's super-simple for their users to move elsewhere. Every sane client supports connecting to multiple networks at the same time.

Dobbs 5y ago

> posterity This is what it has going for it. It is meant to be a drop-in(ish) replacement for freenode. All the same clients, all the same protocols, all the same channels (in theory).

cheph 5y ago
> It is meant to be a drop-in(ish) replacement for freenode A drop in replacement for a place that was run into the ground by the people who now will run the drop in replacement. Good joke. Everybody laugh. Roll on snare drum. Curtains. If the sarcasm is missed, there is nothing at all funny about this abomination. I would much rather trust Andrew Lee than this bunch.

prepend 5y ago

I think protocols are better than systems. Since matrix isn’t an RFC (yet?), I think there’s still value in using an open protocol over a particular system or project. I think an open source project is more scalable and reusable than a proprietary one, but if the goal is long term communication among diverse users, then using a protocol is good.

SamWhited 5y ago
This is one of the big issues with Matrix that doesn't get talked about enough: it's not managed by a real standards body. It was previously run by a company who kept trying to monetize the IP, then it was run by a few people who split off that company (and still kept trying to figure out how to monetize it and pay themselves a wage with it). I'm not against the devs being able to pay themselves, that's great, but the specs themselves shouldn't be run that way. Existing standards bodies have more experience, more legal protections for the users, and are just generally better at developing standards.
- callahad 5y ago
  > Existing standards bodies [...] are just generally better at developing standards. Speaking in a strictly personal capacity, I don't think that point can be taken for granted. The W3C's missteps with HTML5, and WHATWG's success, is a particularly notable failing of a dedicated standards body. The Rust programming language is also developed and codified outside of a traditional standards organization.
  - SamWhited 5y ago
    That's fair; I don't mean to suggest that all standards bodies are perfect all the time, or that they've never made mistakes :) just that it's better than making up a foundation spinoff from a company that doesn't have any experience and will re-invent the wheel yet again instead of submitting the standard to one of the existing standards bodies.
    - joepie91_ 5y ago
      Matrix as a protocol is still in active development. Unlike "low-level" protocols such as HTTP, the Matrix protocol is much closer to end-user experience and so it must be able to move relatively quickly to remain competitive with proprietary systems. This generally does not fit into the process of standards bodies like the IETF very well. There's a reason why eg. the WHATWG exists, basically.
      - SamWhited 5y ago
        Sure, it doesn't have to be the IETF, that was just an example. But even they tend to do this well (by eg. spinning off a smaller more agile standards body to keep up with building extensions more rapidly). Also, rapid development has its own set of problems as we've seen with XMPP (where no two clients support the same set of features because new ones are being developed to keep up with various proprietary things all the time). Anyways, point is, don't reinvent the wheel, I'm sure one of the standard bodies could have been a good fit if we needed this at all, but Matrix definitely isn't a good fit for this Freenode replacement and this is one of the reasons why (the other is that Freenode works just fine and the point is that this is a drop in replacement).
roblabla 5y ago
Matrix is an open protocol[0]. It's not managed by the IETF, but it has an open process for submitting changes. See the Spec Change Proposal instructions[1]. [0]: https://spec.matrix.org/unstable/ https://spec.matrix.org/unstable/ [1]: https://spec.matrix.org/unstable/proposals/ https://spec.matrix.org/unstable/proposals/
- prepend 5y ago
  I read a bit about that and I think it’s positive, but a single company controlling a standard and considering changes is not the same as a protocol.
  - roblabla 5y ago
    https://matrix.org/foundation/ https://matrix.org/foundation/ at the bottom of this page, you'll find the people who are actually in charge with accepting protocol changes (the Spec Core Team). It's true that most are part of New Vector, the for-profit company behind Element and Matrix, but Alexey Rusakov is not as far as I could tell. So there is at least one non-New Vector voice. It honestly feels pretty likely that this is just a maturity thing - as more products are built around Matrix, the Spec Core team will likely become more diverse.
    - joepie91_ 5y ago
      As I understand it, there's actually an explicit desire for more non-NV people to become involved with the SCT. There just aren't very many other organizations to fund it yet - SCT members need to eat too.
      - Arathorn 5y ago
        The situation here is that when we set up the SCT we deliberately picked a 50/50 mix of core Matrix team and community members. What we didn't anticipate is that the community members then were sufficiently sucked into Matrix that they were prepared to work on it fulltime, and a bunch joined Element as the only viable way to do so. Given the team is functioning pretty well and we're improving Matrix, it feels nuts to penalise people based on who they work for, hence the current blend.
rdpintqogeogsaa 5y ago
To be fair, IRC hasn't had an accurate RFC in decades. https://modern.ircdocs.horse/ https://modern.ircdocs.horse/ is the closest to accurate client<->server protocol documentation, but is fully outside the IETF process.

delfinom 5y ago

The ability to google for it and not just end up with 40000000 pages of movie results?

viraptor 5y ago
I checked. "Matrix chat" does not have a single movie reference in the first 3 pages of results. It's really not a problem.
- Biganon 5y ago
  If your search engine thinks you speak French, you might get results about that scene in the movie with the glitchy cat...

SamWhited 5y ago

I'm not really a fan of IRC (a federated network where some OSS projects were on their own servers or different ones would have limited the blast radius of a hostile takeover of one server like this), but Matrix is bloated and slow and the protocol makes no sense for chat (though it may have other applications); it's not a great fit for a large network with lots of people who may or may not have modern hardware. Not to mention that the servers would take a lot more resources to run on Matrix (assuming it eventually gets roughly the same size as Freenode was).

est31 5y ago
The implementations might be bloated (js heavy, etc), and the non bloated implementations written in C++ or Rust or so don't have the full feature set yet, but is it really the protocol to blame? In which way does the protocol make no sense for chat? IRC is extremely complicated as well and a giant pile of hacks.
- SamWhited 5y ago
  For clients maybe not, but for servers the protocol itself is to blame, yes. A giant distributed graph database where everything has to be synced constantly means you use a ton of memory. IRC is definitely complicated, and arguably a pile of hacks, but an event based system (more or less) makes a lot more sense for chat where you want realtime communication (more or less), not to wait while you sync nodes in the graph to every place that wants them.
  - joepie91_ 5y ago
    This makes no sense. Propagating a bunch of messages doesn't suddenly use a ton of memory just because you're organizing them as a graph rather than a linear pubsub-style stream.
    - SamWhited 5y ago
      Sorry, it was a bad explanation. The point is that you have to keep a lot of past state in memory for future messages to make sense and sync properly, unlike an event based system where you (more or less) only need to perform some action when you get an event then forget about it. This is an IRC thread though, sorry I got sucked in but let's not let the Matrix CEO derail it and try to score users. The whole point is is that it didn't make sense for them to switch to matrix because it uses more resources than most IRC servers and because they are trying to be a drop in replacement, not make users sign up for new things.

phaer 5y ago

Wasn't there always the the argument of bridges whenever people tried to convince others to switch to Matrix? IMO it doesn't need to be "better", there are different requirements and preferences among users and between Matrix, IRC and Jabber, each of those ecosystems got their own set of issues.

staz 5y ago

it easier to change what server you connect to in your client, especially if all the channels you connect to move over, than to adopt a new protocol/client/ etc..

rockdoe 5y ago

Talking about Matrix...matrix.org had an IRC bridge to the Freenode network. Is there any up for libera.chat? (The bridge is unreliable, but still very handy to stay connected to old friends)

fundamental 5y ago
I don't think one is setup currently, though based upon some of the IRC channels I'm in it sounds like one is getting actively worked on.
- jordemort 5y ago
  Hoping there's one soon, the only way I connect to IRC these days is through a Matrix bridge and I don't want to run one myself :)
  - Apotheos 5y ago
    Do you have your own server? How hard was it to set up?
    - jordemort 5y ago
      I run my own homeserver. It wasn't too hard to set up but it's fairly resource-intensive. I have it on a big Ryzen and barely notice it but I think it would crush something like a Raspberry Pi (especially if you tried to run it off an SD card)

rataata_jr 5y ago

Can you use Matrix from Emacs?

mouldysammich 5y ago
https://github.com/alphapapa/matrix-client.el https://github.com/alphapapa/matrix-client.el there is this
- medstrom 5y ago
  There is also weechat.el, and weechat has a matrix plugin.

joepie91_ 5y ago

I'm a fan of Matrix as a project, but I don't think that "the house is on fire, we must evacuate" is the correct moment to tell people to move to a different messaging protocol and ecosystem entirely. That's a big change for a community.

ptman 5y ago

Indeed. IRC is closed federation and the server admins are in a great position of power. In an open federation like email or matrix, the power of server admins is much smaller, and this kind of takeover wouldn't happen. Or if it did happen, it would be less of a problem.

immibis 5y ago
This freenode thing shows they have less power than they think. If they abuse it, it's super-simple for their users to move elsewhere. Every sane client supports connecting to multiple networks at the same time.