I mean all this really is is two people sending email really quickly to each other....
Is there something wrong with that
COI – Chat Over IMAP
101–110 of 259 posts
Re: COI – Chat Over IMAP
#102I mean all this really is is two people sending email really quickly to each other....
And all email is is two people sending telegraphs really quickly to each other....
Re: COI – Chat Over IMAP
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
Jeremie Miller, 1999: > "Jabber is a new project I recently started to create a complete open-source platform for Instant Messaging with transparent communication to other IM systems(ICQ, AIM, etc). Matthew Hodgson, 2019: > I think they missed the the bit where Matrix is called Matrix because it bridges (matrixes) the existing networks (Slack, IRC, Telegram, Discord, XMPP, etc) in, rather than needing to convince eve…
https://xkcd.com/927/
https://xkcd.com/1810/ even better.
But hey, we are using IMAP and Mail which is already in the picture.
Re: COI – Chat Over IMAP
#104Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not to mention that it's just re-solving all the same problems other messaging protocols (XMPP, IRC, etc.) spent time solving 10+ years ago. I always feel that the Matrix organization is a bit disingenuous. Not only are they not developed by any recognized standards body (meaning they have no long-term sustainable funding model), but if they really just wanted to connect all the other chat protocols and make sure eve…
i'd argue that the Matrix.org Foundation is just as 'recognized' as the XMPP Standards Foundation :) In terms of disingenuousness - i'd argue that the definition of disingenuous is accusing us of reinventing the wheel rather than acknowledging that Matrix is an entirely different type of technology to IRC or XMPP. It's more similar to NNTP or Git than either IRC or XMPP. For better or worse, trying to solve existing…
> i'd argue that the Matrix.org Foundation is just as 'recognized' as the XMPP Standards Foundation :)
Recognized by whom? The XSF has standardized their core in IETF. Is there something similar for Matrix.org Foundation?
> trying to solve existing problems using new approaches is how things evolve.
What new approaches? You're just recreating federated IM network using different wire format. How on earth is it innovative or new? Using HTTP+JSON instead of TCP+XML is something new? Bridging to other IM networks is something innovative?
> Matrix is an entirely different type of technology to IRC or XMPP. It's more similar to NNTP or Git than either IRC or XMPP.
I've heard this argument many times already, but the truth is that XMPP formally speaking is de juro an "XML routing protocol", but both XMPP and Matrix de facto are being used largely as IM protocols.
> For better or worse, trying to solve existing problems using new approaches is how things evolve.
Since you invented nothing new, you evolve nothing.
Re: COI – Chat Over IMAP
#105E-Mail got extended as much as it could and COI doesn't change anything about it.
If you want something like COI you can use deltachat https://github.com/deltachat/deltachat-android
I couldn't find any specification about anything (encryption, contacts, group-chats,...) and the worst part is that it doesn't even solve the arbitrary problems it poses itself.
privacy? Fat chance when you use E-mail.
"big bad providers" (yes that is the summary of all the other "points") you still have those too
And the solutions that are there and work like matrix or xmpp are no solution, because of user adaption? Hello... Users have to adapt your "protocol" as well and I don't see any added value... It's just an idea for chat over email which I can do right now with the right Client.
Ps matrix AND xmpp both support bridges for other protocols.
Pps they miss the point of what is needed most right now/what the problem is.
Edit while writing others postet the same stuff I postet
Re: COI – Chat Over IMAP
#106Why not build a chat oriented email client instead?
Re: COI – Chat Over IMAP
#107Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://xkcd.com/927/
https://xkcd.com/1810/ even better. But hey, we are using IMAP and Mail which is already in the picture.
https://matrix.org/blog/2017/03/11/how-do-i-bridge-thee-let-... is the matrix take on that one ;P
Re: COI – Chat Over IMAP
#108I really like the idea, but I prefer dedicated self-hosted services like Matrix. You can run a suspicious Matrix instance, but I think privacy falls away as you talk to any Gmail user via CoI. "With XMPP and Matrix.org -based services you would still need to convince everyone to join your new network. Easy in theory, very complex in practice!" I don't find that so problematic. People just needs to see a bit the inner…
You can also run your own mail servers, even non-technical people could do that with for example https://thehelm.com/ . Haven't tried it out myself, though.
Which solves nothing if the other party's email is provided by Google. Google is still getting your chats.
Re: COI – Chat Over IMAP
#109Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not to mention that it's just re-solving all the same problems other messaging protocols (XMPP, IRC, etc.) spent time solving 10+ years ago. I always feel that the Matrix organization is a bit disingenuous. Not only are they not developed by any recognized standards body (meaning they have no long-term sustainable funding model), but if they really just wanted to connect all the other chat protocols and make sure eve…
i'd argue that the Matrix.org Foundation is just as 'recognized' as the XMPP Standards Foundation :) In terms of disingenuousness - i'd argue that the definition of disingenuous is accusing us of reinventing the wheel rather than acknowledging that Matrix is an entirely different type of technology to IRC or XMPP. It's more similar to NNTP or Git than either IRC or XMPP. For better or worse, trying to solve existing…
> Matrix is an entirely different type of technology to IRC or XMPP. It's more similar to NNTP or Git than either IRC or XMPP.
What does this have to do with anything? It's used for chat and solves all the same problems. You could easily have done all the same things (including building a system that does syncing like matrix nodes) on top of an existing protocol instead of reinventing the wheel.
Re: COI – Chat Over IMAP
#110The biggest problem with IMAP from my point of view is spam, that is why there is only a couple of email providers in the world, although still decentralized, they trust each other more than any newcomers, which is kind of preventing this initiative.
IMAP is for receiving.