Re: Matrix communication protocol.

[Msavoritias]

   Like what features are you missing in other clients?
   What do you mean Proprietary Software? Fluffy Chat is AGPL-3. Did you
   even search the clients I mentioned?
   Element is Apache-2. This is all Free Software.
   The encryption not being as good in Matrix it is known. And they are
   looking to upgrade it. See my previous message.
   But aside from that I see Matrix more as a IRC and Discord and Slack
   alternative. For groups.
   And what does it mean that Synapse is the most used now? Coversation is
   the most used Android Client.
   Does that mean that XMPP is not an open protocol and is only for
   Conversations?
   If you want to use Element they are open to changing the captca:
   [1]https://github.com/vector-im/element-web/issues/3606
   If you don't want to like me there is fluffy chat which AGPL-3 and not
   Catpca.
   If you are talking about Desktop there are 6 clients to use one of them
   from Gnome.
   Plus even three terminal ones and one Emacs client.
   I have mentioned before the features:
   First a lot of clients which XMPP lacks.
   Second ease of use which XMPP lacks.
   Third stickers, threads, communities and other modern features that
   people expect for groups from Discord and the likes.
   Or Voice rooms even.
   Keep in mind that all of these and more are planned for Matrix. If you
   go through their github issues.
   MSavoritias

   On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 09:08, Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode)
   <neox@os-k.eu> wrote:

   Le 3 aot 2020 23:45:11 GMT+02:00, Msavoritias
   <[2]marinus.savoritias@disroot.org> a crit :

     Okay First of all I am going to say once more that I am not talking
     about Riot, Element or anything like that. I am talking about the
     protocol. Please read my messages.

   But you're telling us about XMPP on mobile. Have you a functionnal
   alternative to Conversations on Android that has the same features ?

     Third what I know is that Olm is based on Signal encryption. If you
     say that Singnal encryption is not that good then I am afraid our
     conversation ends here because it is clear you don't know what you
     are talking about. That is not to say OMEMO is not good.

   OMEMO is based on Signal encryption, known as Axolotl, and is audited
   by experts (see [3]https://conversations.im/omemo/). Then Olm and
   Megolm appeared, and Megolm is the most used in order to allow people
   to retrieve messages when changing their devices (so no forward
   secrecy).

     Also Element is functional. Like Conversations. Just like other
     clients like Fluffy Chat and Dillo.

   Proprietary software is antifeature.

     Also I am not talking about Synapse. There are other servers to
     choose from. And the higher usage comes at the cost of features
     which XMPP lacks. Personally I find that acceptable.

   But Synapse is the most used.

     What do you mean about advocating Google? The youtube widget?

   Recatpcha, is a best example.

     This is not about beauty or anything like that. It is about
     functionality and modern features that I have first hand experienced
     users caring about.

   Which features are you talking about ???

     MSavoritias On Sun, Aug 2, 2020 at 01:01, Adrien Bourmault (neox on
     Freenode) <[4]neox@os-k.eu> wrote:

     Matrix is a badly designed protocol (especially the s2s part) and is
     not more modern than XMPP. In computer science, be young is not
     always a quality for a protocol, and XMPP has proven many times it
     was evolutive and reliable. The XSF point of view is different from
     the Matrix/Vector one : the XSF is a non profit foundation, in the
     tracks of IETF. They made a protocol in the hope that it will be
     useful and that's it. You can't say the same for Vector. We
     shouldn't have that discussion since the company behind the Matrix
     protocol advocates for non free software, and open source when they
     want to be popular.

     If Conversations are the benchmark for how much behind XMPP is in >
     capabilities that a modern user wants, then I don't know if it can
     be > overcomed.

     I can't understand what do you mean. Conversations is developed by a
     very small team, practically one person, and you conclude that this
     app that evolves permanently has already shown all that could be
     shown ? Excuse me, but at this time there is no client for Matrix as
     functional as Conversations (since non free software usage or
     advocacy is for me an anti-feature worst than "lack of stickers")
     and XMPP server softwares like Ejabberd or Prosody are way more
     reliable and powerful than Synapse (which is subject to
     overconsumption I observed). It is clear that you like Matrix very
     well, but your arguments are wrong and subjective.

     In mobile at least there doesn't seem to be enough development
     outside > of Conversations.

     I can't agree. ChatSecure (for iOS) is a really active project and
     devs of both Conversations and ChatSecure are always in touch, and
     are XSF members. There are many forks of both, and it provides
     additionnal choices for people. On mobile, there is only one
     functionnal Matrix client : Element. And it advocates for non free
     software, especially Google one.

     I know it is pretty popular with privacy folks though. So maybe it
     finds some use there.

     Have you ever read RMS ? Or listen to him ? Everyone should care
     about privacy, everyone should encrypt his communications. XMPP's
     modern encryption (known as OMEMO) is way more secure than
     Olm/Megolm (because it seems Vector thought that forward secrecy was
     an anti-feature lol). Do you think the FSF should advocate for that?
     With all the problems that Vector has, it would be a treason for
     people who trust the FSF. I can understand you like Element because
     it has stickers and it is beautiful. This is the same with other
     software that are unethical but beautiful. Free software is about
     freedom, not popularity Librement, Le 1 aot 2020 19:34:56 GMT+02:00,
     Denver Gingerich <[5]denver@ossguy.com
     <[6]mailto:denver@ossguy.com>> a crit :

     On Sat, Aug 01, 2020 at 07:25:15PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote:

     The second point I was trying to raise is that XMPP doesn't have
     good clients for Mobile,

     You mention this repeatedly without explaining why Conversations has
     "bad design". Most people I know love the design of Conversations,
     so I have trouble seeing why Conversations is holding back XMPP in
     some way.

     doesn't have modern features

     The only feature you have explicitly mentioned is "stickers". I'm
     not sure why this is an important feature for FSF to have in a
     protocol they want to promote. Are there other "modern features"
     that XMPP is missing?

     or even a coherent standard.

     As we've mentioned, there are coherent standards for XMPP. If you
     want a client that supports the important standards, use Gajim or
     Conversations.

     So by that point I was advocating to have a Matrix server so we can
     attract new contributors that may want modern features.

     Per above, please tell us which "modern features" you mean. Thanks!
     Denver <[7]https://jmp.chat/>

     Matrix is a badly designed protocol (especially the s2s part) and is
     not more modern than XMPP. In computer science, be young is not
     always a quality for a protocol, and XMPP has proven many times it
     was evolutive and reliable. The XSF point of view is different from
     the Matrix/Vector one : the XSF is a non profit foundation, in the
     tracks of IETF. They made a protocol in the hope that it will be
     useful and that's it. You can't say the same for Vector. We
     shouldn't have that discussion since the company behind the Matrix
     protocol advocates for non free software, and open source when they
     want to be popular. > If Conversations are the benchmark for how
     much behind XMPP is in > capabilities that a modern user wants, then
     I don't know if it can be > overcomed. I can't understand what do
     you mean. Conversations is developed by a very small team,
     practically one person, and you conclude that this app that evolves
     permanently has already shown all that could be shown ? Excuse me,
     but at this time there is no client for Matrix as functional as
     Conversations (since non free software usage or advocacy is for me
     an anti-feature worst than "lack of stickers") and XMPP server
     softwares like Ejabberd or Prosody are way more reliable and
     powerful than Synapse (which is subject to overconsumption I
     observed). It is clear that you like Matrix very well, but your
     arguments are wrong and subjective. > In mobile at least there
     doesn't seem to be enough development outside > of Conversations. I
     can't agree. ChatSecure (for iOS) is a really active project and
     devs of both Conversations and ChatSecure are always in touch, and
     are XSF members. There are many forks of both, and it provides
     additionnal choices for people. On mobile, there is only one
     functionnal Matrix client : Element. And it advocates for non free
     software, especially Google one. > I know it is pretty popular with
     privacy folks though. So maybe it finds some use there. Have you
     ever read RMS ? Or listen to him ? Everyone should care about
     privacy, everyone should encrypt his communications. XMPP's modern
     encryption (known as OMEMO) is way more secure than Olm/Megolm
     (because it seems Vector thought that forward secrecy was an
     anti-feature lol). Do you think the FSF should advocate for that?
     With all the problems that Vector has, it would be a treason for
     people who trust the FSF. I can understand you like Element because
     it has stickers and it is beautiful. This is the same with other
     software that are unethical but beautiful. Free software is about
     freedom, not popularity Librement, Le 1 aot 2020 19:34:56 GMT+02:00,
     Denver Gingerich <[8]denver@ossguy.com
     <[9]mailto:denver@ossguy.com>> a crit : On Sat, Aug 01, 2020 at
     07:25:15PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote: The second point I was trying
     to raise is that XMPP doesn't have good clients for Mobile, You
     mention this repeatedly without explaining why Conversations has
     "bad design". Most people I know love the design of Conversations,
     so I have trouble seeing why Conversations is holding back XMPP in
     some way. doesn't have modern features The only feature you have
     explicitly mentioned is "stickers". I'm not sure why this is an
     important feature for FSF to have in a protocol they want to
     promote. Are there other "modern features" that XMPP is missing? or
     even a coherent standard. As we've mentioned, there are coherent
     standards for XMPP. If you want a client that supports the important
     standards, use Gajim or Conversations. So by that point I was
     advocating to have a Matrix server so we can attract new
     contributors that may want modern features. Per above, please tell
     us which "modern features" you mean. Thanks! Denver
     [1]<[10]https://jmp.chat/> References 1. <[11]https://jmp.chat/>
     _______________________________________________ libreplanet-discuss
     mailing list [12]libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
     <[13]mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org>
     <[14]https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-disc
     uss>

   _______________________________________________ libreplanet-discuss
   mailing list [15]libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
   [16]https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

References

   1. https://github.com/vector-im/element-web/issues/3606
   2. mailto:marinus.savoritias@disroot.org
   3. https://conversations.im/omemo/
   4. mailto:neox@os-k.eu
   5. mailto:denver@ossguy.com
   6. mailto:denver@ossguy.com
   7. https://jmp.chat/
   8. mailto:denver@ossguy.com
   9. mailto:denver@ossguy.com
  10. https://jmp.chat/
  11. https://jmp.chat/
  12. mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
  13. mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
  14. https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
  15. mailto:libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
  16. https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss