Arathorn

31 ms·

601.
by Arathorn 3y ago
yup, this was not my finest wording :(
602.
by Arathorn 3y ago
> The Graphene guy posted it on Twitter, and by doing so you claimed he "slagged [you] off"[0]. I forget the precise contents of their deleted tweets, and I'd be first to admit that for better or worse I try to be authenti
603.
by Arathorn 3y ago
wow, the pile-on is real tonight. I suggested that GrapheneOS stopped enumerating potential ways to attack Matrix rooms on Twitter if they actually wanted to discourage attacks. Meanwhile, that issue has not remotely been abandoned, and has
604.
by Arathorn 3y ago
https://arewemlsyet.com for the Matrix progress
605.
by Arathorn 3y ago
MIMI isn’t decentralised (having just come back from IETF118 i can confirm this firsthand) - much like MLS, each conversation has a hub. Matrix however is decentralised, and decentralised MLS is live and well and in active development - we
606.
by Arathorn 3y ago
It's an interesting pattern to be sure. It's not all negative though (e.g. this thread has a few moments of positivity mixed in with all the folks jumping to the conclusion that we're trying to pull a Hashicorp). I have a fe
607.
by Arathorn 3y ago
no plan to consolidate; current plan is to keep improving Synapse as a mature & stable server, and use Dendrite as a test bed for new ideas (eg account portability)
608.
by Arathorn 3y ago
Yes, the commercial Matrix vendors are all using proprietary forks. The layoffs were from Element; the Foundation has only a managing director as an employee (who started a few months ago). And yes, the layoffs have been a nightmarish loss
609.
by Arathorn 3y ago
If Element explodes by whatever mechanism, other folks can fork the AGPL code to keep it going. We’re looking into mechanisms to ensure CLA’d code stays published under an OSI compatible license regardless of the type of explosion, which I
610.
by Arathorn 3y ago
the spec has no CLA, and I don’t believe the Foundation has plans to add CLAs.
611.
by Arathorn 3y ago
fwiw, the main problem with the CLA seems to be that folks have assumed the intention is to use it to switch Synapse & co to a closed license in future - which I honestly hadn’t even considered as a possibility. For one thing, we could
612.
by Arathorn 3y ago
fwiw, it’s not targeted at Beeper, who support Matrix via the Foundation, and who I believe are happy to publish their synapse changes under the AGPL. It’s targeting companies and governments with many billions of dollars at their disposal
613.
by Arathorn 3y ago
The reason for the CLA is so we can sell AGPL exceptions to those who are allergic to AGPL, not so we can further relicense down the road.
614.
by Arathorn 3y ago
We don’t want to un-open-source the project. We’re not trying to pull a hashicorp or set up to do so; we just want the option to dual license to sell AGPL exceptions.
615.
by Arathorn 3y ago
What?! I'm not making up the forks!! I already mentioned a bunch of them at the top of https://matrix.org/blog/2022/12/25/the-matrix-holiday-update... when trying to get folks to donate to the Found
616.
by Arathorn 3y ago
Well, I’m not going to name & shame them given we’re trying to sort out alternative licensing so they can continue their forks…
617.
by Arathorn 3y ago
No, the rough timeline is this: * 2014: Matrix core team creates Matrix, writes Synapse and other implementations, starts writing the Matrix spec * 2017: Matrix core team wants to be able to focus on this exclusively as their dayjob; create
618.
by Arathorn 3y ago
If it's any consolation, the fundamental asymmetry replaces a previous asymmetry that Element uniquely donated all of its core Matrix code, including ownership, to the Foundation. But yes, I wish that the economics balanced without a
619.
by Arathorn 3y ago
If folks want to keep their contributions on their own fork and not sign a CLA that's fine too. Yes, we're trying to monetise our code in order to pay folks to keep working on it.
620.
by Arathorn 3y ago
Speaking as CEO at Element - I don't particularly like CLAs either from an ideological perspective. However, the only way that Element can retain the right to provide alternative licenses to proprietary forks is if it has the right to
621.
by Arathorn 3y ago
I'm not sure it's a win to be mentioned, given I failed to successfully raise the alarm over the impact of the OSB. All very frustrating and depressing.
622.
Matrix.org Foundation Appoints Josh Simmons as Managing Director(matrix.org)
4 points by Arathorn 3y ago|0 comments
623.
by Arathorn 3y ago
The same attack could be mounted against a Matrix server tbh. But the fact Matrix is E2EE by default would mitigate it a bit, and if folks verified who they were talking to then the attack would be defeated.
624.
by Arathorn 3y ago
> Thank you for staying in touch with critics! That's super encouraging and so is your "Matrix 2.0" talk. thanks. > I don't want to berate you, but ... > After hours of, experimentation and piecing together Clie
625.
by Arathorn 3y ago
I responded to this as Matrix project lead over at https://lobste.rs/s/wvi9xw/why_not_matrix#c_erbsnb ftr. Unfortunate that the original article has no way to leave comments.
626.
by Arathorn 3y ago
(I'd argue that it /is/ there now, as of last week: https://element.io/blog/element-x-ignition . And should certainly be there next year. But i'm biased :)
627.
by Arathorn 3y ago
The Matrix CS API is super simple (although i’m biased having helped design it), and the fact that there are a large range of clients these days which frankly outperform historical Element while having feature parity - eg FluffyChat, Cinny,
628.
by Arathorn 3y ago
Yup, we're doing our best to nail it this time - and there's a lot of UX design chops involved. Hopefully the Ignition release of Element X shows that we've headed in the right direction at last :)
629.
by Arathorn 3y ago
It will gain you: * The ability to use the end-to-end encryption identity & verification from your normal Matrix account, by piggybacking on the 'host' matrix client. Whereas call.element.io is not remotely designed (at all)
630.
by Arathorn 3y ago
The reason historically for multiple concurrent implementations is because we're building a protocol, and multiple implementations dogfoods that - plus the different implementations service different segments. In practice, Hydrogen an

More ›