12 ms·

> meaning people from different servers can talk to each other while no central authority can have influence on another server unlike Matrix Elaborate please.

> meaning people from different servers can talk to each other while no central authority can have influence on another server unlike Matrix Elaborate please. Matrix doesn't have a central authority server which can influence other servers.

jagermo 5y ago
Also, the bridge system in matrix is solid. Most people do not want to ban all other messengers, but they want all their communication in one place. Matrix-based messengers like Element or Bleeper seem like the way to go. And if people then start using matrix based chatrooms, all the better. But I doubt you can reach critical mass with a system that is not open to other chat systems, even if those are closed.
- akho 5y ago
  XMPP has bridges.
  - jagermo 5y ago
    Yes, but it does not sell them well. Look at Beeper (beeper.com) or Element One (element.io), they actively market the fact, that you can use whatsapp or signal or telegram with them. Using matrix is nearly an afterthought, it's more like using pidgin or trillian back in the day. And I think it's clever because it lets me switch away from whatsapp etc, but I don't have to bring all my friends over at once. And, once I am on board, I can start to look into the features provided by matrix. People don't switch to a protocol, I think, they want to leave a service or provider. And yes, you are still part of whatever walled garden you choose to use, but whatsapp can run on an old phone and never touch my new phone, never getting the data on that device.
    - zamadatix 5y ago
      Beeper seemed cool but trying to find out more it just put me on a waitlist. Element One is extremely limited in bridges. Element Home seems better in that regard but still doesn't have a major one for me Google Chat/Hangouts. Neither seems clear on if I can use my personal domain while they host and manage the homeserver+bridges. Element One mentions subdomains and beeper mentions self hosting but neither seem to comment on personal domains which seem a natural fit to use for a federated service.
      - apfsx 5y ago
        I've been so excited for Beeper since the beginning of the year but just like you, I'm on the waitlist and have been for almost 10 months now. I'm dying to try it, and if it functions how they've described it only makes me want it more. A few weeks back I got an itch and started watching any videos online and came across a few from the founder and their main developer (the one developing all the matrix bridges that I believe even Element One is using? maybe?). For someone in my situation, if it works its priceless and if they wanted 3x or 4x the monthly fee I'd still be more than okay with it. Hell, I'd pay extra just for early access. I've always struggled to keep up with my communication and a big one for me is iMessage. But aside from that everything else I use for family (WhatsApp,Telegram,FBMessenger), work (Skype,Slack), and friends (iMessage,Discord) is stressful for me everyday switching between all the apps when looking for something, remembering who I need to respond to, switching to phone (I don't use Mac, so iMessage only when I'm actually on my phone which is not often).
    - akho 5y ago
      XMPP is decentralized in practice (as opposed to Matrix, which is decentralized in theory, with everyone using the same client on the same server using the sole available server implementation). There are hundreds of public servers and dozens of clients. Nobody runs marketing campaigns. Judging by the state of most transports, actual long-term interest in that feature is limited. I don’t know if Matrix does something in a sufficiently different way for bridges (apart from ICQ) to be actively used. Commercial services, by necessity, try to differentiate themselves. That prevents full interoperability.
- MattJ100 5y ago
  XMPP was developed as an open protocol to bridge to proprietary communication platforms, just as Matrix is today. There are still such bridges (more commonly called "gateways" or "transports" in XMPP), such as for WhatsApp, Signal, and others. However my perception is that over the long period of time XMPP has been around, focus shifted to the "native" XMPP-XMPP use-case, because it's easier to build a better experience that way. My personal prediction is that Matrix will certainly go the same way - using a focus on bridging to bootstrap the network in the initial years, and then gradually shifting to focus on "native Matrix" for most use-cases after reaching a certain critical mass.
- goodpoint 5y ago
  > the bridge system in matrix is solid Solid? They crash or malfunction all the time.
  - gefhfff 5y ago
    Can't confirm, using xmpp and Telegram bridge here
  - xorcist 5y ago
    Isn't the bridging software pretty much the same? Last time I check both used Spectrum, at least for evertything libpurple related. So at least in theory they should be equally stable, unless it is just a question of code maturity which should improve over time.
  - jagermo 5y ago
    Sorry, not a native speaker. Yes, they are a bit wonky, with solid, I meant well established and (comparatively) easy to set up.
Arathorn 5y ago
Yup, Matrix as a network has no central authority at all, although it's a common untruth which gets passed around, rather depressingly. Things which could be at the root of this misunderstanding include: * The fact that we operate a *strictly optional* logically centralised directory service to look up matrix IDs by email address or phone number. I really wish we'd never added this to Matrix; it causes way more grief than it solves - we'd have been better off waiting off for someone to build a decentralised keybase service and use that instead. * Element runs a centralised integration manager (aka app store) to make it easier to add bots/bridges/widgets to rooms. Again, this is completely optional - although back in 2019 we had a stupid bug in Element Web which meant it checked the integration manager even if you weren't using it. This was fixed in June 2019 (https://github.com/vector-im/element-web/issues/6802 https://github.com/vector-im/element-web/issues/6802). * Element has to query your server to find out what authentication mechanisms are available before you log in. Therefore if its config points to the default matrix.org homeserver, you end up pinging that every time you log in, even if your homeserver is elsewhere. The solution for now is to change your default homeserver in the config to avoid this. * Servers need to be able to validate events from servers even if those servers are offline. To do this you need to grab the public key for the offline server from somewhere; by default Synapse uses matrix.org as a fallback, but loudly nags the admin to pick a better default when you install the server. None of these actually allow a "central authority to have influence on another server" though; I've just listed the only places I can think of where a typical self-hosted Matrix implementation might interact with centralised services run by Matrix.org or Element. Unfortunately I think the real root of the misinformation is that it's just a bit too tempting and easy to throw around FUD. Some day we may get to the point where alternative FOSS projects will realise that the real enemy are centralised proprietary user-exploiting services rather than one another...
- zaik 5y ago
  Matrix is a lot better than every proprietary service, but it's poor XMPP compliance currently makes it impossible to have essential features like encrypted communications or adding Matrix users to multi-user chats.
  - 5y ago
betwixthewires 5y ago
The identity server is probably what is being referenced here.
- IceWreck 5y ago
  The identity server can be and is self hosted by a lot of people.
  - betwixthewires 5y ago
    True, but because of the architecture it is not very useful self hosted unfortunately.

jagermo 5y ago

Also, the bridge system in matrix is solid. Most people do not want to ban all other messengers, but they want all their communication in one place. Matrix-based messengers like Element or Bleeper seem like the way to go. And if people then start using matrix based chatrooms, all the better. But I doubt you can reach critical mass with a system that is not open to other chat systems, even if those are closed.

akho 5y ago
XMPP has bridges.
- jagermo 5y ago
  Yes, but it does not sell them well. Look at Beeper (beeper.com) or Element One (element.io), they actively market the fact, that you can use whatsapp or signal or telegram with them. Using matrix is nearly an afterthought, it's more like using pidgin or trillian back in the day. And I think it's clever because it lets me switch away from whatsapp etc, but I don't have to bring all my friends over at once. And, once I am on board, I can start to look into the features provided by matrix. People don't switch to a protocol, I think, they want to leave a service or provider. And yes, you are still part of whatever walled garden you choose to use, but whatsapp can run on an old phone and never touch my new phone, never getting the data on that device.
  - zamadatix 5y ago
    Beeper seemed cool but trying to find out more it just put me on a waitlist. Element One is extremely limited in bridges. Element Home seems better in that regard but still doesn't have a major one for me Google Chat/Hangouts. Neither seems clear on if I can use my personal domain while they host and manage the homeserver+bridges. Element One mentions subdomains and beeper mentions self hosting but neither seem to comment on personal domains which seem a natural fit to use for a federated service.
    - apfsx 5y ago
      I've been so excited for Beeper since the beginning of the year but just like you, I'm on the waitlist and have been for almost 10 months now. I'm dying to try it, and if it functions how they've described it only makes me want it more. A few weeks back I got an itch and started watching any videos online and came across a few from the founder and their main developer (the one developing all the matrix bridges that I believe even Element One is using? maybe?). For someone in my situation, if it works its priceless and if they wanted 3x or 4x the monthly fee I'd still be more than okay with it. Hell, I'd pay extra just for early access. I've always struggled to keep up with my communication and a big one for me is iMessage. But aside from that everything else I use for family (WhatsApp,Telegram,FBMessenger), work (Skype,Slack), and friends (iMessage,Discord) is stressful for me everyday switching between all the apps when looking for something, remembering who I need to respond to, switching to phone (I don't use Mac, so iMessage only when I'm actually on my phone which is not often).
  - akho 5y ago
    XMPP is decentralized in practice (as opposed to Matrix, which is decentralized in theory, with everyone using the same client on the same server using the sole available server implementation). There are hundreds of public servers and dozens of clients. Nobody runs marketing campaigns. Judging by the state of most transports, actual long-term interest in that feature is limited. I don’t know if Matrix does something in a sufficiently different way for bridges (apart from ICQ) to be actively used. Commercial services, by necessity, try to differentiate themselves. That prevents full interoperability.
MattJ100 5y ago
XMPP was developed as an open protocol to bridge to proprietary communication platforms, just as Matrix is today. There are still such bridges (more commonly called "gateways" or "transports" in XMPP), such as for WhatsApp, Signal, and others. However my perception is that over the long period of time XMPP has been around, focus shifted to the "native" XMPP-XMPP use-case, because it's easier to build a better experience that way. My personal prediction is that Matrix will certainly go the same way - using a focus on bridging to bootstrap the network in the initial years, and then gradually shifting to focus on "native Matrix" for most use-cases after reaching a certain critical mass.
goodpoint 5y ago
> the bridge system in matrix is solid Solid? They crash or malfunction all the time.
- gefhfff 5y ago
  Can't confirm, using xmpp and Telegram bridge here
- xorcist 5y ago
  Isn't the bridging software pretty much the same? Last time I check both used Spectrum, at least for evertything libpurple related. So at least in theory they should be equally stable, unless it is just a question of code maturity which should improve over time.
- jagermo 5y ago
  Sorry, not a native speaker. Yes, they are a bit wonky, with solid, I meant well established and (comparatively) easy to set up.

Arathorn 5y ago

Yup, Matrix as a network has no central authority at all, although it's a common untruth which gets passed around, rather depressingly. Things which could be at the root of this misunderstanding include: * The fact that we operate a *strictly optional* logically centralised directory service to look up matrix IDs by email address or phone number. I really wish we'd never added this to Matrix; it causes way more grief than it solves - we'd have been better off waiting off for someone to build a decentralised keybase service and use that instead. * Element runs a centralised integration manager (aka app store) to make it easier to add bots/bridges/widgets to rooms. Again, this is completely optional - although back in 2019 we had a stupid bug in Element Web which meant it checked the integration manager even if you weren't using it. This was fixed in June 2019 (https://github.com/vector-im/element-web/issues/6802 https://github.com/vector-im/element-web/issues/6802). * Element has to query your server to find out what authentication mechanisms are available before you log in. Therefore if its config points to the default matrix.org homeserver, you end up pinging that every time you log in, even if your homeserver is elsewhere. The solution for now is to change your default homeserver in the config to avoid this. * Servers need to be able to validate events from servers even if those servers are offline. To do this you need to grab the public key for the offline server from somewhere; by default Synapse uses matrix.org as a fallback, but loudly nags the admin to pick a better default when you install the server. None of these actually allow a "central authority to have influence on another server" though; I've just listed the only places I can think of where a typical self-hosted Matrix implementation might interact with centralised services run by Matrix.org or Element. Unfortunately I think the real root of the misinformation is that it's just a bit too tempting and easy to throw around FUD. Some day we may get to the point where alternative FOSS projects will realise that the real enemy are centralised proprietary user-exploiting services rather than one another...

zaik 5y ago
Matrix is a lot better than every proprietary service, but it's poor XMPP compliance currently makes it impossible to have essential features like encrypted communications or adding Matrix users to multi-user chats.
- 5y ago

betwixthewires 5y ago

The identity server is probably what is being referenced here.

IceWreck 5y ago
The identity server can be and is self hosted by a lot of people.
- betwixthewires 5y ago
  True, but because of the architecture it is not very useful self hosted unfortunately.