Arathorn

52 ms·

841.
by Arathorn 4y ago
> Have you guys considered changing the licensing to require larger organizations to contribute financially to the protocol? Yes, but the concern is that this would chill Matrix network growth - e.g. larger orgs currently building on Mat
842.
by Arathorn 4y ago
Here's me literally writing a working Matrix client by typing ~7 lines of bash into a HN comment box: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20948530
843.
by Arathorn 4y ago
The problem with maintaining bridges is that there are loads of them, and by definition they are a moving target to track the destination systems. So while there's a three person full-time bridge team, they don't have bandwidth t
844.
by Arathorn 4y ago
Yup, UX is more important than T&S, because without good UX, folks won't use an app in the first place, making the role of T&S moot. The role of project lead (if executed well) is more important too, in terms of keeping the pr
845.
by Arathorn 4y ago
> Why in the world would anybody use Matrix if you made it closed-source (as you've so cleverly disguised it, """open""" core)? Matrix is a protocol. People can use it whatever the license of the implem
846.
by Arathorn 4y ago
well, “we had to lay off the trust & safety team” could be construed to mean that we don’t think t&s is important - whereas in practice it’s one of the core pillars of the whole project. so instead we positioned it as a reset, which
847.
by Arathorn 4y ago
yup, it’s a very noticable improvement - 15% or so.
848.
by Arathorn 4y ago
> Huh interesting, I though the end goal was to replace synapse with Dendrite? Originally, yes. But Synapse has ended up needing to support some massive deployments, and took quite a lot of inspiration from Dendrite in doing so. Meanwhil
849.
by Arathorn 4y ago
well, the problem is that while big folks are adopting Matrix, it looks like we have a nightmare feedback loop in progress: now that Matrix is good enough for everyone to run it at scale, most of the commercial orgs doing so don’t feel the
850.
by Arathorn 4y ago
Disappearing messages are due to land this coming year - https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-spec-proposals/blob/mat... is the spec for it. For metadata protection, we're relying on P2P Matrix ( https:&
851.
by Arathorn 4y ago
Author here in case anyone has any questions :)
852.
This Year in Matrix(matrix.org)
64 points by Arathorn 4y ago|33 comments
853.
by Arathorn 4y ago
Airdrop (AWDL) is open, within iOS and macOS at least, and P2P Matrix uses it :)
854.
by Arathorn 4y ago
arewep2pyet.com. making progress tho!
855.
by Arathorn 4y ago
oops, https://www.golem.de/news/bwmessenger-vom-messenger-der-bund... might be the right link
856.
by Arathorn 4y ago
we’ll miss you :’(
857.
by Arathorn 4y ago
Element X is a native app, and will replace Element Desktop for many purposes, fwiw (and will be also adopted by BundesMessenger)
858.
by Arathorn 4y ago
I wrote this sentence. “closed proprietary” here means that it’s not an open standard, and it’s not an open network you can connect your own clients to, and so it’s vendor-locked, and in the case of Signal there are gaps of years when they
859.
by Arathorn 4y ago
Tchap is doing great actually :)
860.
by Arathorn 4y ago
you can see screenies on the app stores: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=de.bwi.messeng... etc
861.
by Arathorn 4y ago
Signal and Threema are proprietary, in that the protocol they speak is vendor-specific and not openly standardised. You are literally locked to that system, and neither of them allow 3rd party clients to connect. Moreover, Threema's s
862.
by Arathorn 4y ago
Good question about FOI and audit; unsure for their deployment. In general we use audit bots when needed (which are visible in the member list), and even in a client-controlled-membership world, they would complain bitterly if they saw traf
863.
by Arathorn 4y ago
Gematik co-funded the most recent Matrix audit of vodozemac[1], and is poised to fund 3 more (of matrix-rust-sdk-crypto, matrix-rust-sdk and the whole stack end-to-end) to ensure the E2EE is where it needs to be. So I'd say that the G
864.
by Arathorn 4y ago
Mattermost is great, but it's not decentralised, it doesn't federate, it's not end-to-end encrypted, it's not based on an open standard, it's vendor-locked to Mattermost, only has one usable client implementation, a
865.
by Arathorn 4y ago
It does sponsor some development, although we still have a big gap on overall Matrix funding currently (hence trying to drum up additional sponsors and support via https://matrix.org/blog/2022/12/01/fundi
866.
by Arathorn 4y ago
yup. and to be clear, Matrix really needs the money right now: https://matrix.org/blog/2022/12/01/funding-matrix-via-the-ma...
867.
by Arathorn 4y ago
Element doesn't have the $, thanks to footing the bill for most (90%+) of the core Matrix work on behalf of the rest of the Matrix ecosystem.
868.
by Arathorn 4y ago
The process is: * Audits cost $$$K * The Matrix project doesn’t have pots of money sitting around to spend on audits. We get around $8K/month of donations on Patreon, which currently doesn’t even cover the running costs of matrix.org.
869.
by Arathorn 4y ago
We’re actually looking to support Zig as an authoring language for user generated content for Third Room - the spatial collaboration platform for Matrix. Not sure this would be a killer app like a Matrix server or gateway or something, but
870.
by Arathorn 4y ago
The problem is that the paper conflates legitimate implementation vulns (fixed back in Sept) which indeed allowed for practical attacks… with the “group membership controlled by server” issue, which is debatable. Hence folks writing off the

More ›