5 ms·

At least you can switch networks. With apps like discord you don't even have that option when the admins misbehave.

by swiley 5y ago

mumblemumble 5y ago
You still can, it's just that you have to switch apps too. Which undoubtedly creates more upheaval, and I am guessing that a lot more people would get left behind in the process. But still, it's not like communities that don't use IRC are helpless.
- mbreese 5y ago
  However, this does reinforce the idea that: protocols > programs But you can’t get funding for managing a protocol.
  - Pet_Ant 5y ago
    Protocols are better than programs because they give users power. Programs are better than protocols because they don’t give users power. It’s a matter of perspective.
    - mbreese 5y ago
      You’re right, of course. But I think that if your goal is to build a robust system, protocols win. If you want to monetize your users, then you absolutely need that walled garden and ease of use that a program provides. If you have a protocol based application, then you can only really monetize the service, not your users. For example, only a few email providers have enough users to sell ads (Gmail). There are far more providers that sell the service as opposed to advertising to users. Although, I will admit building a robust protocol is difficult. It is much easier to iterate a feature set if you only have to worry about one implementation. But this is a trade off between short term gains at the expense of the long term. Email for all its warts will still be around in 10 years. Can we say the same for Slack?
  - mumblemumble 5y ago
    There's also an ease of use thing. "Slack" and "Discord" can both be thought of as monolithic entities. For less technical communities, that helps with the onboarding. You don't have to worry yourself about the details of networks and servers and clients and nickservs and whatnot. Teaching someone to use irc is a rather thornier issue, and even some tech people might bounce off of it unless they have a compelling reason to burn time on RTFM. Depending on the values of the community, those practical concerns may or may not outweigh other considerations. There's a lot to be said for open protocols, but there's also a lot to be said for UX.
    - swiley 5y ago
      >Teaching someone IRC You mean handing them xchat/colloquy/kiwichat and telling them to come up with a name and click this text box to send a message? Sure irssi is hard to use but unlike Slack and Discord you're not stuck with a single terrible client.
      - TheAdamAndChe 5y ago
        And tell them how to register the nickname, and tell them how to log in, and tell them how to list rooms and join them. Then teach them about op codes. (Lack of) Ease of use is a big reason for IRC's loss in popularity.
        swiley 5y ago
        You don't need to register a nickname (I didn't when I used freenode) In the clients I mentioned listing and joining rooms works the same way it does on discord and slack: you open the list and click the ones you want to join.
        SamoyedFurFluff 5y ago
        Discord/Slack already has a bunch of those things- how to mute channels is a big one, as well as how to change ones nickname, how to get a role, and managing permissions for various channels.
        5y ago
  - marcodiego 5y ago
    This! Skype users had no choice after microsoft take-over. Whatsapp users had no choice after facebook take-over. Proprietary software is a choice you impose on yourself; proprietary protocols and formats a choice you impose on the others too.
  - halfmatthalfcat 5y ago
    Comes down to UX. If your frontend isn't ergonomic, you're doomed. OSS chat protocols suffer from too much choice. Users don't want to go app hunting, they want one stop shopping and be told what to use. Having a centralized platform is making the choice for the consumer and they're happy to oblige.
    - thomasahle 5y ago
      > they want one stop shopping and be told what to use Until that app becomes unusable / bought by Andrew Lee and they wish there was an alternative they could easily migrate to.
- tallanvor 5y ago
  It's been 15 years since I've used IRC, but what changed with the apps? All the apps I used to use let you choose what domains to connect to.
  - swiley 5y ago
    iOS isn't designed for apps that connect to servers not run by the App Author. Push messages must be signed by a key registered to the developer and there is no mechanism to delegate that (for example.)
apexalpha 5y ago
I don't understand. What stops people from switching to Slack from Discord or whatever? Can people connected to Freenode join your channel on Libara? If not, what exactly is the difference?
- progval 5y ago
  To switch from Discord to Slack (or between any two protocols), you need to learn how to use the new app, set-up new integrations, rewrite your bots, and hope you did not depend on a feature Slack is missing.
  - chapium 5y ago
    Both discord and slack have web based versions which are far superior to the associated apps in my opinion.
- tw04 5y ago
  The difference is one motion requires users to install and learn a completely new application that likely has a different feature set. The other requires them to simply update their server list. If someone has been using IRC for a decade they likely have some automated workflows built out. If they had put in that effort with slack bots or whatever - being forced to abandon or start over from scratch is a PITA.
  - apexalpha 5y ago
    I agree that it might be harder to switch if you have Bots or some other automation running. Although since it's just text it should work the same after changing read/write API's. The other points seem a bit exaggerated. The "new app" to install is just a browser usually. I used IRC a lot in the past but being a protocol also means it's barely been updated in the past. There's so much functionality in Discord / Slack and others compared to IRC that dwarf the negative aspects of "learning an entire new app" whenever you want to switch.
    - 5y ago

At least you can switch networks. With apps like discord you don't even have that option when the admins misbehave.

by swiley 5y ago

At least you can switch networks. With apps like discord you don't even have that option when the admins misbehave.

You still can, it's just that you have to switch apps too. Which undoubtedly creates more upheaval, and I am guessing that a lot more people would get left behind in the process. But still, it's not like communities that don't use IRC are helpless.

mbreese 5y ago
However, this does reinforce the idea that: protocols > programs But you can’t get funding for managing a protocol.
- Pet_Ant 5y ago
  Protocols are better than programs because they give users power. Programs are better than protocols because they don’t give users power. It’s a matter of perspective.
  - mbreese 5y ago
    You’re right, of course. But I think that if your goal is to build a robust system, protocols win. If you want to monetize your users, then you absolutely need that walled garden and ease of use that a program provides. If you have a protocol based application, then you can only really monetize the service, not your users. For example, only a few email providers have enough users to sell ads (Gmail). There are far more providers that sell the service as opposed to advertising to users. Although, I will admit building a robust protocol is difficult. It is much easier to iterate a feature set if you only have to worry about one implementation. But this is a trade off between short term gains at the expense of the long term. Email for all its warts will still be around in 10 years. Can we say the same for Slack?
- mumblemumble 5y ago
  There's also an ease of use thing. "Slack" and "Discord" can both be thought of as monolithic entities. For less technical communities, that helps with the onboarding. You don't have to worry yourself about the details of networks and servers and clients and nickservs and whatnot. Teaching someone to use irc is a rather thornier issue, and even some tech people might bounce off of it unless they have a compelling reason to burn time on RTFM. Depending on the values of the community, those practical concerns may or may not outweigh other considerations. There's a lot to be said for open protocols, but there's also a lot to be said for UX.
  - swiley 5y ago
    >Teaching someone IRC You mean handing them xchat/colloquy/kiwichat and telling them to come up with a name and click this text box to send a message? Sure irssi is hard to use but unlike Slack and Discord you're not stuck with a single terrible client.
    - TheAdamAndChe 5y ago
      And tell them how to register the nickname, and tell them how to log in, and tell them how to list rooms and join them. Then teach them about op codes. (Lack of) Ease of use is a big reason for IRC's loss in popularity.
      - swiley 5y ago
        You don't need to register a nickname (I didn't when I used freenode) In the clients I mentioned listing and joining rooms works the same way it does on discord and slack: you open the list and click the ones you want to join.
      - SamoyedFurFluff 5y ago
        Discord/Slack already has a bunch of those things- how to mute channels is a big one, as well as how to change ones nickname, how to get a role, and managing permissions for various channels.
      - 5y ago
- marcodiego 5y ago
  This! Skype users had no choice after microsoft take-over. Whatsapp users had no choice after facebook take-over. Proprietary software is a choice you impose on yourself; proprietary protocols and formats a choice you impose on the others too.
- halfmatthalfcat 5y ago
  Comes down to UX. If your frontend isn't ergonomic, you're doomed. OSS chat protocols suffer from too much choice. Users don't want to go app hunting, they want one stop shopping and be told what to use. Having a centralized platform is making the choice for the consumer and they're happy to oblige.
  - thomasahle 5y ago
    > they want one stop shopping and be told what to use Until that app becomes unusable / bought by Andrew Lee and they wish there was an alternative they could easily migrate to.
tallanvor 5y ago
It's been 15 years since I've used IRC, but what changed with the apps? All the apps I used to use let you choose what domains to connect to.
- swiley 5y ago
  iOS isn't designed for apps that connect to servers not run by the App Author. Push messages must be signed by a key registered to the developer and there is no mechanism to delegate that (for example.)

apexalpha 5y ago

I don't understand. What stops people from switching to Slack from Discord or whatever? Can people connected to Freenode join your channel on Libara? If not, what exactly is the difference?

progval 5y ago
To switch from Discord to Slack (or between any two protocols), you need to learn how to use the new app, set-up new integrations, rewrite your bots, and hope you did not depend on a feature Slack is missing.
- chapium 5y ago
  Both discord and slack have web based versions which are far superior to the associated apps in my opinion.
tw04 5y ago
The difference is one motion requires users to install and learn a completely new application that likely has a different feature set. The other requires them to simply update their server list. If someone has been using IRC for a decade they likely have some automated workflows built out. If they had put in that effort with slack bots or whatever - being forced to abandon or start over from scratch is a PITA.
- apexalpha 5y ago
  I agree that it might be harder to switch if you have Bots or some other automation running. Although since it's just text it should work the same after changing read/write API's. The other points seem a bit exaggerated. The "new app" to install is just a browser usually. I used IRC a lot in the past but being a protocol also means it's barely been updated in the past. There's so much functionality in Discord / Slack and others compared to IRC that dwarf the negative aspects of "learning an entire new app" whenever you want to switch.
  - 5y ago