3 ms·

A few things: - I think the revenue streams you all have from a Federated EU make an actually federated Matrix ecosystem much more likely :). - It's a pity

A few things: - I think the revenue streams you all have from a Federated EU make an actually federated Matrix ecosystem much more likely :). - It's a pity that EU economic policy is so terrible, and constitutionally so. I bet Matrix's finances would be a in a much better position if European countries could run healthy deficits like the US does. - AFIAK their excuse was that Matrix didn't have account migration. I wonder if Matrix having had that would have made them use it, or they were looking for an excuse for NiH anyways. - Conversely, now that they *do* have it, it does make Matrix at some point getting it a bit more important.

steveklabnik 3y ago
Transparent account migration is one of the most interesting parts of AT to me, as a user, so I for one am glad they went their own way. That said I don't really know Matrix at the protocol level, so I can't really speak to it, but just based off of what you said.
- Arathorn 3y ago
  So Matrix also has account portability (almost) - https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-spec-proposals/blob/kegan/pseudo-ids/proposals/4014-pseudonymous-identities.md https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-spec-proposals/blob/keg... and https://github.com/devonh/matrix-spec-proposals/blob/cryptoIDs/proposals/4080-cryptographic-identities.md https://github.com/devonh/matrix-spec-proposals/blob/cryptoI..., implemented in Dendrite. Unfortunately dev is paused on it currently thanks to lack of $ though. The AP approach (prioritising portable identities over portable account data) is cute though, and perhaps we should have prioritised that as an alternative to fullblown cryptographic IDs & account portability.
  - steveklabnik 3y ago
    Thanks for the context! I use Matrix daily, so I am interested in these details, I just haven't found the time to dig into things yet.
  - Ericson2314 3y ago
    The ideal situation is that BlueSky and Matrix (/Element, let's be real) are giving hoards of money and are dancing around each other in a daring game of adversarial interop. I want a Cold War-scale federation competition, dammit! :)
    - Arathorn 3y ago
      I would love both BlueSky & Matrix (and/or Element) to be given hoards of money and for us to race each other to the best federation imaginable (and then bridge it all together and live happily ever after)
- ianopolous 3y ago
  To be clear, strong account portability predates Bluesky by ~5 years. Peergos[0], as reviewed by Jay before Bluesky Inc was created, has had this for years: https://book.peergos.org/features/migration.html https://book.peergos.org/features/migration.html So they didn't actually need to go their own way. [0] https://github.com/peergos/peergos https://github.com/peergos/peergos
olah_1 3y ago
> their excuse was that Matrix didn't have account migration Neither does BlueSky… or if they do “have” it, it’s never been used because there is still only one server.
- steveklabnik 3y ago
  You're not wrong but you're also not fully right: there has been a second instance that the devs have been using to test out the federation code. It's not yet open to the public because they are still working on the implementation. At the protocol level, it is very much there, but you are right to point out that the advantages haven't been fully realized just yet.
  - olah_1 3y ago
    That makes sense. I guess I would just add that the users don’t know if it’s a good experience yet. Maybe it sounds good on paper but in practice it amounts to a nothingburger and is essentially the same as manually moving instances in the fediverse.
    - steveklabnik 3y ago
      It is very different than manually moving instances in the Fediverse, in my understanding. For one, it's totally transparent to the people that are following. All of your data comes with you. You don't lose your posts, your followers don't lose following you. I know Mastodon has at least recently gained account portability to some degree, but https://docs.joinmastodon.org/user/moving/ https://docs.joinmastodon.org/user/moving/ has some serious drawbacks that aren't present in the AT model.
      - Ericson2314 3y ago
        In general, it seems like ActivityPub is terrible, and all the mastodon people are deluded or worse about its technical merits.
        3y ago

steveklabnik 3y ago

Transparent account migration is one of the most interesting parts of AT to me, as a user, so I for one am glad they went their own way. That said I don't really know Matrix at the protocol level, so I can't really speak to it, but just based off of what you said.

Arathorn 3y ago
So Matrix also has account portability (almost) - https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-spec-proposals/blob/kegan/pseudo-ids/proposals/4014-pseudonymous-identities.md https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-spec-proposals/blob/keg... and https://github.com/devonh/matrix-spec-proposals/blob/cryptoIDs/proposals/4080-cryptographic-identities.md https://github.com/devonh/matrix-spec-proposals/blob/cryptoI..., implemented in Dendrite. Unfortunately dev is paused on it currently thanks to lack of $ though. The AP approach (prioritising portable identities over portable account data) is cute though, and perhaps we should have prioritised that as an alternative to fullblown cryptographic IDs & account portability.
- steveklabnik 3y ago
  Thanks for the context! I use Matrix daily, so I am interested in these details, I just haven't found the time to dig into things yet.
- Ericson2314 3y ago
  The ideal situation is that BlueSky and Matrix (/Element, let's be real) are giving hoards of money and are dancing around each other in a daring game of adversarial interop. I want a Cold War-scale federation competition, dammit! :)
  - Arathorn 3y ago
    I would love both BlueSky & Matrix (and/or Element) to be given hoards of money and for us to race each other to the best federation imaginable (and then bridge it all together and live happily ever after)
ianopolous 3y ago
To be clear, strong account portability predates Bluesky by ~5 years. Peergos[0], as reviewed by Jay before Bluesky Inc was created, has had this for years: https://book.peergos.org/features/migration.html https://book.peergos.org/features/migration.html So they didn't actually need to go their own way. [0] https://github.com/peergos/peergos https://github.com/peergos/peergos

olah_1 3y ago

> their excuse was that Matrix didn't have account migration Neither does BlueSky… or if they do “have” it, it’s never been used because there is still only one server.

steveklabnik 3y ago
You're not wrong but you're also not fully right: there has been a second instance that the devs have been using to test out the federation code. It's not yet open to the public because they are still working on the implementation. At the protocol level, it is very much there, but you are right to point out that the advantages haven't been fully realized just yet.
- olah_1 3y ago
  That makes sense. I guess I would just add that the users don’t know if it’s a good experience yet. Maybe it sounds good on paper but in practice it amounts to a nothingburger and is essentially the same as manually moving instances in the fediverse.
  - steveklabnik 3y ago
    It is very different than manually moving instances in the Fediverse, in my understanding. For one, it's totally transparent to the people that are following. All of your data comes with you. You don't lose your posts, your followers don't lose following you. I know Mastodon has at least recently gained account portability to some degree, but https://docs.joinmastodon.org/user/moving/ https://docs.joinmastodon.org/user/moving/ has some serious drawbacks that aren't present in the AT model.
    - Ericson2314 3y ago
      In general, it seems like ActivityPub is terrible, and all the mastodon people are deluded or worse about its technical merits.
      - 3y ago