Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

On Privacy versus Freedom

matrix.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 209 posts

Re: On Privacy versus Freedom

#131

Post by Leer10 »

progval wrote: post #126
blindgeek wrote: post #110

My biggest problem with messaging applications as a whole is that I need so many of them. I have a few contacts who are reachable with Signal, a few more who are reachable on Hangouts or whatever Google is calling its latest thing, and a few more who are reachable with Skype. That's three programs, to communicate with three different subsets of people. I'm sure if I used Facebook Messenger and Whatsapp, I'd have two…

> XMPP was supposed to solve all those problems when it came out That's also what Matrix said it would solve when it started. Except now it's yet another protocol with its own chatrooms that are not reachable from any other protocol by default (even rooms on matrix.org); and bridges are at best in "beta" (except the Telegram bridge, which is "late beta"): https://matrix.org/bridges/

In practice those bridges function very well. It's common to find channels in the Matrix ecosystem that have IRC and Discord users that aren't even aware that there's Matrix participants.

Re: On Privacy versus Freedom

#132

Post by noyesno »

blindgeek wrote: post #124
IIAOPSW wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>One frustrating thing about Moxie's original post is that Signal derives huge amounts of value by piggybacking on an existing distributed federated network: the phone system. If phone numbers weren't an existing working identifiers that people had regardless of what OS oh my sweet summer child. I hop countries and switch phones every few years. This entire assumption that my identity is tied to a phone number which…

Snipped out of context from: https://signal.org/blog/the-ecosystem-is-moving/ "However, over the past six years, we’ve also seen the user cost of switching between centralized communication services reduced substantially, particularly given the tendency towards addressing with user-owned identifiers like phone numbers." Does he really believe that phone numbers are user-owned? My phone carrier owns my number. If I'm…

The ownership of a domain name is not guaranteed - even just in HN there are multiple stories of domains being taken away for questionable reasons.

Re: On Privacy versus Freedom

#133

Post by slipheen »

yarrel wrote: post #76
nirs wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain how GPL prohibits distribution via app stores?

It doesn't. The Apple app store prohibits the GPL.

Apple does not prohibit the GPL. Some people such as the FSF say it is incompatible, but Apple isn't stopping people from publishing GPL apps.

That's why Signal added a rider which explicitly allows their app on the App Store - So it's not a factor here.

Re: On Privacy versus Freedom

#134

Post by saagarjha »

tzs wrote: post #50
nirs wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain how GPL prohibits distribution via app stores?

Generally, the way app stores work is that the developer uploads a copy of the app to the app store, and then the app store makes and distributes copies of that for people that request the app. Note that since it is the app store making those copies for end users, the app store needs permission of the copyright owner to do so. There will be something in the agreement between the app developer and the app store that s…

> Most app stores require downloaders to agree to a license agreement with the app store, which typically includes things like prohibiting reverse engineering and prohibiting reselling or making and distributing copies.

Apple’s (https://www.apple.com/legal/internet-services/itunes/dev/std...) actually has a very interesting clause that seems like you can discard their EULA and substitute your own (with some minimal restrictions pertaining to making sure that you don’t bring Apple into it and comply with warranty laws and such):

> Your license to each App is subject to your prior acceptance of either this Licensed Application End User License Agreement (“Standard EULA”), or a custom end user license agreement between you and the Application Provider (“Custom EULA”), if one is provided.

So can you just substitute one that grants your users the GPL freedoms?

Re: On Privacy versus Freedom

#135

Post by progval »

Leer10 wrote: post #131
progval wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> XMPP was supposed to solve all those problems when it came out That's also what Matrix said it would solve when it started. Except now it's yet another protocol with its own chatrooms that are not reachable from any other protocol by default (even rooms on matrix.org); and bridges are at best in "beta" (except the Telegram bridge, which is "late beta"): https://matrix.org/bridges/

In practice those bridges function very well. It's common to find channels in the Matrix ecosystem that have IRC and Discord users that aren't even aware that there's Matrix participants.

The IRC bridge between matrix.org and freenode disconnects almost every week, showing sometimes hundreds of clients disconnecting, then reconnecting a few hours later.

I didn't check it personally, but I heard they (understandably) have issues enforcing bans: if one of their users is banned but another one is in the channel, the banned user can still read messages.

Re: On Privacy versus Freedom

#136

Post by blindgeek »

noyesno wrote: post #132
blindgeek wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Snipped out of context from: https://signal.org/blog/the-ecosystem-is-moving/ "However, over the past six years, we’ve also seen the user cost of switching between centralized communication services reduced substantially, particularly given the tendency towards addressing with user-owned identifiers like phone numbers." Does he really believe that phone numbers are user-owned? My phone carrier owns my number. If I'm…

The ownership of a domain name is not guaranteed - even just in HN there are multiple stories of domains being taken away for questionable reasons.

Of course. Nothing in life is guaranteed. I'm sure the Buddha would tell me that "there ain't no such thing as permanent". Nevertheless, I've had my domain name longer than I've had my current phone number. I'm far more likely to put up a fight for that name than I would be to fight for the current string of digits that represents me in the phone system. Maybe the whole concept of user-owned identifiers is a myth, or a Platonic ideal. At least in my case, my phone number is pretty far from the Platonic ideal.

Re: On Privacy versus Freedom

#137

Post by blindgeek »

progval wrote: post #126
blindgeek wrote: post #110

My biggest problem with messaging applications as a whole is that I need so many of them. I have a few contacts who are reachable with Signal, a few more who are reachable on Hangouts or whatever Google is calling its latest thing, and a few more who are reachable with Skype. That's three programs, to communicate with three different subsets of people. I'm sure if I used Facebook Messenger and Whatsapp, I'd have two…

> XMPP was supposed to solve all those problems when it came out That's also what Matrix said it would solve when it started. Except now it's yet another protocol with its own chatrooms that are not reachable from any other protocol by default (even rooms on matrix.org); and bridges are at best in "beta" (except the Telegram bridge, which is "late beta"): https://matrix.org/bridges/

I have lots of warm and fuzzy feelings toward Matrix, but my take is that XMPP solved my basic problem over 15 years ago. The problem being: I want to talk to Alice, Bob, Mary, Jane, Fred, and Joe without having to install ICQ, AIM, and Yahoo Messenger. Or should I say Facebook, Whatsapp, and Signal? I don't know what Matrix buys me over XMPP, but at this point, I don't care. I'll gladly drink the Matrix kool-aid, as long as it solves my problem and somehow ends up being the clear winner among federated protocols.

I don't think XMPP "lost" because it was bad technology. AFAIK the big players are still using it in various places under the hood. It lost because big players want to build "ecosystems".

Re: On Privacy versus Freedom

#138

Post by scarejunba »

ATsch wrote: post #60
arusahni wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's his reasoning: https://twitter.com/moxie/status/1211443530335281153

This seems kind of silly to me because: 1. Does the same thing not also apply to the blog post he authored, which contains the exact same points? 2. Is a talk where you get a big stage to preach your opinion from and take two questions at the end really the best way to do this? As opposed to say, a panel discussion or similar.

He wants to have a conversation where he can use shorthand that won't be turned against him later through decontextualized misunderstanding. This doesn't sound unreasonable to me at all. In fact, it's something we take advantage of frequently as individuals.

If I were a high-profile person recorded for everything I did I'd almost certainly be raked over the coals for "Just kill all the apaches. They are fucking useless." when talking to a friend as we hacked on apache running in forked mode and spawned a million processes that can't respond. This is why I use nginx now. Much safer.

Re: On Privacy versus Freedom

#139

Post by Arathorn »

progval wrote: post #121
Arathorn wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nearly; we’re aiming to force on E2E by default at end of Jan (but it’s getting tight). There are at least 6 complete independent implementations, and once cross-signing lands it’s good to go. For clients/bots/bridges without E2E we have pantalaimon (a clientside daemon which you proxy all the traffic through in order to encrypt it).

Out of curiosity, what are these implementations?

matrix-js-sdk, matrix-ios-sdk, matrix-android-sdk, matrix-androidx-sdk (soon to be refactored out of riotx), matrix-nio (py3), mtx-client (c++).

In dev you also have libQuotient, metaolm and matrix-purple.

matrix-python-sdk also has support, but got replaced by matrix-nio.

Re: On Privacy versus Freedom

#140

Post by balladeer »

stiray wrote: post #128
blindgeek wrote: post #110

My biggest problem with messaging applications as a whole is that I need so many of them. I have a few contacts who are reachable with Signal, a few more who are reachable on Hangouts or whatever Google is calling its latest thing, and a few more who are reachable with Skype. That's three programs, to communicate with three different subsets of people. I'm sure if I used Facebook Messenger and Whatsapp, I'd have two…

And those are the reasons I use phone calls, sms and email. It is more than enough to keep contacts and to arange where you will meet in-person. For distant relations I prefer email, I always loved a well formed letter where sender has actually put some thought into it. Yeah, I dont have 999 friends but those 10 good friends is all I need. And they DO call, sms, email me. For everyone else I dont care.

Personal emails also help with the urge to reply "right then" and there are no single, double, blue, grey ticks.
Post reply on HN