You had the chance to nail a Whatsapp joke, and you failed.
As intended.
Because it wasn’t a WhatsApp joke?
I’m so glad I didn’t see this picture at night. Now I’m going to hide this post.
It would be nice to have something Fedi to replace Signal, now that Signal dropped SMS support and seem to be trying to become the next WhatsApp/Discord.
If you’re looking for the lemmy model of open source software on federated servers and you only have to trust the server admin, you’re looking for Matrix. If you want to try something newer and more trustless, check out SimpleX!
E: spellkng
I have it on my phone! Seems neat for totally anon chats.
Did you talk to someone else on it?
I mean, I would if I knew anyone that wanted to chat on it. TBH Telegram is good enough for me privacy wise. Signal if your paranoid. Discord is public chat in my mind. Slack for getting stuff done at work. Matrix / Element if I feel like going back to IRC level weirdness.
Isn’t it just supposed to be a secure/private version of WhatsApp?
What are they doing that is bad?
Dropping SMS support made it almost completely unusable with most of my contacts, but also they’re trying to become a social media company, as if we needed another one of those.
He sees you when you’re sleeping
He knows when you’re awake
He knows more than you could ever know about you
He Even knows when you masturbate
So… I guess “Sup.” beta is delayed…
I was really looking forward to a decentralized, self hostable Signal…
Its called matrix haha?
XMPP?
I am afraid that this is a real picture that he took. If so… Why???
Because “Sweet Baby Ray’s”.
Did you say Sup?
I’m still not entirely sure what problem Sup is trying to solve. Matrix already exists. Matrix supports E2EE through the signal protocol, as well as native federation, and it bridges to almost any existing chat service. Matrix is inherently less secure, overall, than Signal, but I don’t see how Sup would fix this either – for that I’ll have to wait and see. As for using one’s fedi account to sign-in, that’s mostly just up to supporting OAuth, and not some feature that would be unique to the app.
How is matrix less secure? If you don’t mind me asking.
I point you to this thread, and this thread for explanatioins from those who are more knowledgeable on the topic than I.
What I don’t like with Matrix is the load it puts on the server. It basically copies 100% of a room content to any server having one or more users registered in the room.
So if you’re on a small server, and one user decides to join a 10k+ large room, your server may collapse under the load as it tries to stay in sync with the room’s activity. This is deterrent to self-hosting or family/club/small party servers.
XMPP, on the other hand, has proven to be highly scalable, has E2EE, federation and some bridging services.
The only thing XMPP does NOT have is a single reference multiplatform client with all basic features for 2023 (1:1 chat, chat rooms, voice/video 1:1, and voice/video conference) than anyone can use without wondering if the features-set is the same as the persons you’re talking to.
And while we’re there: I’m not even sure I want a messaging account linked to any of my Fediverse accounts…
What I don’t like with Matrix is the load it puts on the server. It basically copies 100% of a room content to any server having one or more users registered in the room.
Retroactively?? I’m sure that one could configure this to not be the case… no?
So if you’re on a small server, and one user decides to join a 10k+ large room, your server may collapse under the load as it tries to stay in sync with the room’s activity.
“Collapse” meaning what, exactly? Do you mean run out of storage from the volume of content, or that processing all the messages is too taxing?
XMPP, on the other hand, has proven to be highly scalable
How does it scale differently than Matrix?
I’m not even sure I want a messaging account linked to any of my Fediverse accounts…
Out of curiosity, why do you say this?
“Collapse” meaning what, exactly? Do you mean run out of storage from the volume of content, or that processing all the messages is too taxing?
Years back, I setup a Synapse’s server on my personal server (Yunohost). At some point, I joined the “big” Matrix room. Bad idea: RAM and CPU usage went through the roof. I had to kill the server but even that took forever as the system was struggling with the load.
But don’t just take my words for it:
https://github.com/matrix-org/synapse/issues/7339
Last comment is from less than one year ago. I was told things should be better with newer servers (Dendrite, Conduit, etc.), but I’ve not tried these yet. They’re still in development.
How does it scale differently than Matrix?
The Matrix protocol is a replication system: your server will have to process all events in the room one or more users attend(s) to. There is a benefit to this: you can’t shut down a room by shutting down any server: all the other ones are just as “primary” as the original. Drawback: your humble personal server is now on the hook.
XMPP rooms are more conventional: a room is located on one server. That’s an “old” model, but it scales.
https://www.ejabberd.im/benchmark/index.html
That’s for the host. For other attendees, it’s much lower.
I don’t think I atteld any public room out there with 3k users, so I can’t report my first hand experience, this is the best I found. But I never had to check for load issue on a small server (running Metronome and many more services).
Out of curiosity, why do you say this?
I don’t use the Fediverse the way I engage with individual people. If I want a closer relation with someone, I don’t want to be bound to yet-another-messenging system, let alone on multiple accounts
And another reason is I may not want to be bothered by people I don’t know, regardless how much I could appreciate reading and/or exchanging with them in the Fediverse.
Ignoring or declining requests from strangers can leave a lot to interpretation and then frustration. Remove the button and no one is tempted to press it the be disappointed with the outcome. Less drama.
And that’s only considering well intended people.
But these are my humble 2cents.
“Collapse” meaning what, exactly? Do you mean run out of storage from the volume of content, or that processing all the messages is too taxing?
Years back, I setup a Synapse’s server on my personal server (Yunohost). At some point, I joined the “big” Matrix room. Bad idea: RAM and CPU usage went through the roof. I had to kill the server but even that took forever as the system was struggling with the load.
But don’t just take my words for it:
It appears that issue is closed as per this comment:
This should hopefully be significantly improved in the upcoming v1.36.0 release. I’m going to close this for now, if people still see issues after updating then feel free to make a new issue.
So pehaps this issue that you are describing is now fixed?
How does it scale differently than Matrix?
[…] XMPP rooms are more conventional: a room is located on one server. That’s an “old” model, but it scales. […]
This only scales so long as the single server is able to keep up with all of the requests. In the replication, as you have described, all the instances sort of act like load balancers – they spread the individual requests, and concentrate them into single links between the instances.
And another reason is I may not want to be bothered by people I don’t know, regardless how much I could appreciate reading and/or exchanging with them in the Fediverse.
I think I see what you are getting at with this. Would it be like, for example, if your Lemmy account is also tied to Matrix, then someone on Lemmy could send you a request to talk on Matrix? Granted this could already be assumed to occur if one uses the same username for all of their accounts, but it could possbily be more of an issue if it was more directly integrated. That being said, I’m not sure how realistic this scenario would be since the Matrix protocol is completely independent of Activity Pub. The only connection between accounts that I can think of is OAuth.
Isn’t that just IRC
Nope, because you cannot connect with accounts from a different network.
XMPP is pretty much federated without advertising it as being federated. This is just how it works.
Remember when gchat was XMPP then Google fucked that right up?
Pepperidge Farms remembers.
Remember when Facebook had an XMPP bridge to their messenger?
Good to know, thanks
Wait really?
