• 94 Posts
Joined 8M ago
Cake day: Aug 02, 2020


This seems like a really bad idea. If it were some form of simplified paypal like feature, why not, though I would still think that it would not be a feature to expect out of a messaging app.

However, this seems to be using some new cryptocurrency, which is really likely to turn off non tech-saavy users.

According to Wikipedia

Telegram Messenger states that its end goal is not to bring profit,[25][26] but it is not currently structured as a non-profit organization.[27]

It’s basically funded by a millionaire and has no business model. They stated that they intend to create their own Ad system for the one to many channels. I wouldn’t bet on them in the long term.

Pay what you can as a business model for free software

Currently, most of free software is either entirely developed by people on their free time or is funded by donations. This works to some extent but it struggles being an attractive model for a lot of use cases. …

For Firefox, it may be wise for Pi-Hole to have an option to enable the canary domain so that it sticks to standard queries on your home network even if DoH is enabled by default.

You can get pretty good performance with WebGL and WebAssembly, so this won’t be such an issue. If it means that we can have a Linux client without Wine I like it.

Even though it would be a bad Idea to do it for AAA games, Eve Online doesn’t really seem like the type of games that require a ton of resources to run, so it’s fine.

I do agree with the sentiment that browsers are becoming too complex and that web standards should slow down though.

Free software is heavily correlated to privacy yes. And the Fediverse pretty much entirely free software. However, the technical aspect of federation has little to do with privacy. A free software centralised social network could be pretty private, even more than the Fediverse , because the data is not shared with multiple hosts. And the other way works too. You could build a federated social network that is significantly less private than the Fediverse currently is.

Also, the Fediverse can only be considered private to the extent that there are no advertising trackers on the platforms. However, pretty much every post on the Fediverse can be viewed by anyone.

To be honest I think that this posts kinda misses the point of federation. Federation is not really about privacy (it wouldn’t make sense anyway since most of the fediverse content is entirely public).

The fediverse brings freedom to social networking, allowing us not to be dependant on a single host. The state of the fediverse is already significantly better than centralised networks in this regard. Also, the none of the hosting platforms criticised here rely on the number one factor of erosion of privacy: advertisement. I have a really hard time believing that Amazon, and other hosting providers spy on the VMs they host (outside of police investigations). It would be quite expensive and inefficient for them to extract any useful information. Unlike Facebook/Twitter host providers already have a clear business model that doesn’t involve advertisement, and they have a lot to lose if it turned out that they spied on their customer’s VMs.

At least now we know that this instance is properly backed up :)

This video is basically an advertisement for the I3wm and other scriptable WM/linux desktops from someone that doesn’t know anything about Linux.

The thread is about centralized vs decentralized. Availability on OSes, polished UIs and so on are besides the point.

Yes, your are obviously right. Who cares about the end user? /s

This thread linked by OP contains someone talking about attachment not working. I wasn’t able to find where I remember reading about someone not being able to make reactions work.

It actually seems like they have already been criticised in the past for being slow to release the server side code: https://community.signalusers.org/t/where-is-new-signal-server-code-why-not-share-signal/15068/2

I edited the comment with citation.

Briar suffers from the problems I mentioned about P2P requiring more battery and not being able to use push notifications. It also has the works UX of the lot, since you can’t even begin communicating with someone without being in having a way to get them a cryptographic identifier/QR code. No way anyone but the most tech savvy will ever use it. Also, it’s still not available on IOs.

I just tried and the app seems to work perfectly fine even without being given the permission to access the address book.

I do agree with most of what you said here but here are a few things:

What I call centralized/federated are things like XMPP/Matrix, which require servers to function but are interoperable. What I call P2P are apps that don’t need any servers (beside a few bootstrap nodes) to function like Tox. As you said, when it comes to battery, Matrix/XMPP work fine with push notifications, and users don’t need their phones to be on all the time.

A lot of UX could be improved in Element, that is completely separate from the fact that it is federated. I have never used XMPP though. The #1 problem is that apps for federated services will always have to present you a screen “what instance are you using ?”, and ask you to do your own research to find a decent one, whereas centralised services can just create your account on the fly.

Some of them. However some open-source ones have also be audited and have research done on them. I would love to see enough funding for some of the open-source messengers to get official audits.

Can you share some sources for that? Last time I checked I failed to find any info on Matrix passing (or not) third party audits. If you have something about another decentralised protocol with audited implementations I’d be happy to have it.

citation needed

That’s fair, I was just lazy in my first post. I don’t think it’s impossible to develop a federated protocol that leaks very little metadata like Signal, but it would be a pain to get different clients/server version to handle it correctly. One aspect is also that with whatever metadata still leaks, you will have to trust two servers (receiving and sending) instead of just one.

Here are a few examples of what metadata Signal protects that Matrix doesn’t:

For 99% of the people that use messaging services, convenience is the number 1 priority.

Because centralized messengers

  • Have better UX than federated ones
  • Are more reliable than P2P ones (less battery usage, messages can be sent without the need for both clients to be online at the same time)
  • Have been audited by third parties
  • Leak less metadata

Edit: Here are a few examples of what metadata Signal protects that Matrix doesn’t:

The thing is, I first thought that it was not updated frequently simply because the server side of Signal is really simple (it’s only role is to forward messages after all), so the code was very rarely touched.

However there seems to be people that have tried to run their own infrastructure that are not able to get some features to work.

Would it be even legal for them to run an updated version of the server without releasing it as FLOSS given the AGPL license?

I wonder what the author thinks of the Crev - Code REView project It seems like it could be very valuable if large organisations were to publicly submit reviews for the dependencies they use and have already reviewed. It would not be a full security audit, but Facebook/Google/Mozilla essentially saying “this dependency doesn’t run rm -rf /” would be a great thing.

Seems like a nice FLOSS project, to use instead of the standard proprietary crapware that are often used. …

Interesting post about dark patterns. …

Element has been removed from the play store

Google have suspended Element in the Play Store without notifying us; we’re reaching out to find out what’s going on. Apologies for the inconvenience; in the interim there’s https://f-droid.org/en/packages/im.vector.app/ but it’s a few versions behind. We’ll post updates here…