4 ms·

> No support for server-side history That's a feature, not a bug. If you want conversations to be searchable, use email. Instant messaging is like phone calls

by elric 2y ago

> No support for server-side history That's a feature, not a bug. If you want conversations to be searchable, use email. Instant messaging is like phone calls or in person communication: transient (if potentially async). > No support for attachments. Good, no silly gifs cluttering up the chat. But this is a feature that's easily added. > Poor user authentication This one probably has the most merit. But probably easy to implement with a few server tweaks. > Short - and unpredictable - message length limits Brevity is a feature. It's a chat, no one wants to listen to a monologue in conversation. The unpredictability is a bit annoying. > Crude permissions system How fine grained do you need it to be? Read and write access for channels exist. There are plenty of bots which can grant additional permissions based on whatever criteria you set out. But hey, I'm also that stubborn bastard who still likes text-only email.

duskwuff 2y ago
> [server-side history] That's a feature, not a bug. Whatever your personal feelings on message history are, people and businesses need functionality like usable mobile clients they can receive messages in without keeping the client open continuously, or the ability for administrators to delete messages which have been sent by other users. IRC doesn't, and cannot, provide those features. > [no attachments] Good, no silly gifs cluttering up the chat. Also means it's difficult to discuss inherently audiovisual content like graphical designs, or to transfer files -- all things that come up in business contexts. > [permissions] How fine grained do you need it to be? It's not that the permissions aren't fine-grained so much as that the entire system is crudely designed. Users' permissions in a channel are mostly tied to their presence in the channel; if you leave and rejoin (or disconnect and reconnect to IRC), any permissions are lost and have to be regranted by another user in the channel. Bans are tied to nicknames (which are volatile) or connection hostnames (which are differently volatile). Invite-only channels use passwords. And so on. It's a mess. Yes, you can add bots to handle some of that for you -- but having to rely on bolt-on components for basic functionality is a sign of a badly designed service.
- elric 2y ago
  > people and businesses need functionality like usable mobile clients they can receive messages in without keeping the client open continuously Do they really, though? If Jim isn't at his desk and I still need to talk to him, I can just send him an email, or try again later. That is the part of communication that IRC excels at: fleeting conversations. IRC chat history is old-school FOMO.
  - duskwuff 2y ago
    > Do they really, though? Yes. Usable mobile clients are table stakes for a modern messaging service. Caveats like "if you put your phone down for a few minutes you fall offline and any messages sent during that time are lost to you forever" are, quite simply, not acceptable. It's not the year 2000 anymore. Not everyone is sitting at a desk in front of their computer eight hours a day. Software needs to adapt.
jmclnx 2y ago
I do not know why you were down voted, but I fully agree with you. I do not want to see pictures in IRC at all, you want pictures, movies etc, got to one of the many pointy-clicky apps. Or you can PM and send the pic to the person who wants it via email. No history, good for me, but you want history enable logging in your client. User authentication - maybe a bit harder for new people, but you also have the option of turning on encryption if you want. One missing item, with cloaking, you can have anonymity which is lacking in all the other "apps". I see no need to change IRC at all, and I think the Freenode "owner" tried to change it and a revolt happened. Just about everyone moved to Libera chat.
- Teckla 2y ago
  The solution to these issues isn't to simply not have those features, but to make it possible to toggle those features on/off.

by elric 2y ago

duskwuff 2y ago

> [server-side history] That's a feature, not a bug. Whatever your personal feelings on message history are, people and businesses need functionality like usable mobile clients they can receive messages in without keeping the client open continuously, or the ability for administrators to delete messages which have been sent by other users. IRC doesn't, and cannot, provide those features. > [no attachments] Good, no silly gifs cluttering up the chat. Also means it's difficult to discuss inherently audiovisual content like graphical designs, or to transfer files -- all things that come up in business contexts. > [permissions] How fine grained do you need it to be? It's not that the permissions aren't fine-grained so much as that the entire system is crudely designed. Users' permissions in a channel are mostly tied to their presence in the channel; if you leave and rejoin (or disconnect and reconnect to IRC), any permissions are lost and have to be regranted by another user in the channel. Bans are tied to nicknames (which are volatile) or connection hostnames (which are differently volatile). Invite-only channels use passwords. And so on. It's a mess. Yes, you can add bots to handle some of that for you -- but having to rely on bolt-on components for basic functionality is a sign of a badly designed service.

elric 2y ago
> people and businesses need functionality like usable mobile clients they can receive messages in without keeping the client open continuously Do they really, though? If Jim isn't at his desk and I still need to talk to him, I can just send him an email, or try again later. That is the part of communication that IRC excels at: fleeting conversations. IRC chat history is old-school FOMO.
- duskwuff 2y ago
  > Do they really, though? Yes. Usable mobile clients are table stakes for a modern messaging service. Caveats like "if you put your phone down for a few minutes you fall offline and any messages sent during that time are lost to you forever" are, quite simply, not acceptable. It's not the year 2000 anymore. Not everyone is sitting at a desk in front of their computer eight hours a day. Software needs to adapt.

jmclnx 2y ago

I do not know why you were down voted, but I fully agree with you. I do not want to see pictures in IRC at all, you want pictures, movies etc, got to one of the many pointy-clicky apps. Or you can PM and send the pic to the person who wants it via email. No history, good for me, but you want history enable logging in your client. User authentication - maybe a bit harder for new people, but you also have the option of turning on encryption if you want. One missing item, with cloaking, you can have anonymity which is lacking in all the other "apps". I see no need to change IRC at all, and I think the Freenode "owner" tried to change it and a revolt happened. Just about everyone moved to Libera chat.

Teckla 2y ago
The solution to these issues isn't to simply not have those features, but to make it possible to toggle those features on/off.