3 ms·

I think that's a fair question. I guess my idea of winning is like the web vs. gopher. I want the good, federated protocol to become the default. I want my fri

I think that's a fair question. I guess my idea of winning is like the web vs. gopher. I want the good, federated protocol to become the default. I want my friends to be using it not because I have to nag them to, but because it's just objectively a better experience. The federated nature of the thing being invisible and irrelevant to them. I think today that's impossible - not because of issues related to Matrix, but because of deeper problems with our computing stack and the web. Federated systems can't match the UX of centralized ones and when they come close its often because they've recentralized anyway. I think we agree more than we disagree probably. I just see Signal as good given the current tradeoffs.

rglullis 5y ago
The fundamental issue is that I don't see how we can define what is a "objectively better experience", not for any sufficiently large group of people with different values and priorities. Any attempt at establishing these comes through some central planning which leads at best to some cookie-cutter "one-size-fits-all" Apple-esque design that while functional, it's just a local maxima that destroys any kind of creativity and makes everything uniform and bland. > Federated systems can't match the UX of centralized ones and when they come close its often because they've recentralized anyway. I think it is easier to see it as an issue with the amount of resources that the big companies have vs the "underdogs". If Element had the same amount of resources as Facebook, it wouldn't be hard for them to say "we will build a client that is just like WhatsApp for those that think that WhatsApp is the benchmark. For those that want something like Discord, we will build another client. And those that want to use Matrix to replace Slack will get another client that does exactly the same". It does not matter if it is federated or centralized, what matters is that Element does not have those resources, so they can not develop as fast as their competitors and then are seen as "lagging".

rglullis 5y ago

The fundamental issue is that I don't see how we can define what is a "objectively better experience", not for any sufficiently large group of people with different values and priorities. Any attempt at establishing these comes through some central planning which leads at best to some cookie-cutter "one-size-fits-all" Apple-esque design that while functional, it's just a local maxima that destroys any kind of creativity and makes everything uniform and bland. > Federated systems can't match the UX of centralized ones and when they come close its often because they've recentralized anyway. I think it is easier to see it as an issue with the amount of resources that the big companies have vs the "underdogs". If Element had the same amount of resources as Facebook, it wouldn't be hard for them to say "we will build a client that is just like WhatsApp for those that think that WhatsApp is the benchmark. For those that want something like Discord, we will build another client. And those that want to use Matrix to replace Slack will get another client that does exactly the same". It does not matter if it is federated or centralized, what matters is that Element does not have those resources, so they can not develop as fast as their competitors and then are seen as "lagging".