2 ms·
i dont see the counterpoint here, which company has poured even a fraction of a percent into IRC as Google has with its myriad of messengers or Whatsapp/Telegra
by dijit 3y ago
i dont see the counterpoint here, which company has poured even a fraction of a percent into IRC as Google has with its myriad of messengers or Whatsapp/Telegram ec?
One google engineer on his personal time introduced entirely new systems into IRC (RobustIRC) https://robustirc.net/ https://robustirc.net/ which is the most commercial support that exists.
The IRCv3 initiative is a very small number of people, none of them supported commercially.
- jrochkind1 3y agoCompanies apparently do not see incentive to pour that kind of money into software for open protocols. We can talk about whether they are rational or irrational, but from a perspective of maximizing profit I think they are probably rational. I agree what it gets the consumer is crap.
- nemothekid 3y agoThe claim was if we had interoperability we would see progress. IRC exists and we didn't. Now your claim is if we had interoperability and there was a benevolent giant willing to pour billions in investment we would see progress.
- dijit 3y agoAh, well, I still disagree IRC was that. XMPP was that, and it saw widespread adoption up until Facebook and Google walled off their XMPP federation- slack even disabled its XMPP bridge (that wasnt federated). Companies definitely killed that open protocol, though there could be arguments against XMPP: functionally they could have been worked around, there is just a significant financial incentive to not want to.