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

Dino: An open-source application for XMPP messaging

dino.im

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 153 posts

Re: Dino: An open-source application for XMPP messaging

#61

Post by seba_dos1 »

asnyder wrote: post #30
larma wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a section on motivation in the blog post (it literally has "Motivation" in the title): > A number of clients already exist for the XMPP protocol, however Dino sets a different focus. Existing clients target tech-savvy power users. The XMPP ecosystem lacks a client that is enjoyable to use while providing the features people expect from a modern chat application. Dino fills that gap by aiming to be secure and…

http://pidgin.im seems to be pretty easy. Doesn't require any tech-savvyness other than entering your credentials in a nice, intuitive interface, unless I'm missing something?

Pidgin is a very bad XMPP client these days - at least until you have spent quite a lot of time on gathering and configuring all the plugins needed for modern XMPP experience.

Re: Dino: An open-source application for XMPP messaging

#62

Post by Andrew_nenakhov »

ryukafalz wrote: post #13
Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #7

Congrats on release, but the title is incorrect, word 'decentralized' should be removed. XMPP, like email, is not a 'decentralized' protocol, but a federated one. If you and your chat partners use the same server, it would be as centralized as WhatsApp or Signal.

Federated protocols are decentralized, though; there's no central point of control. This graphic has been done to death at this point but it's relevant here: https://www.kaushik.net/avinash/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/c...

Baran drew this pic almost 80 years ago. Since then, 'Decentralized' has become an umbrella term for both decentralized and distributed networks, and 'Federated' is currently a commonly accepted name for Email/XMPP type of networks. [1]

This makes sense, because Baran was describing a communication network, like later ethernet, where nodes were interchangeable, wherever in XMPP the nodes are not interchangeable: if you have an account on xmpp.org server, you can't connect to xmpp.jp server and receive your messages. Thus, such networks required a special more narrow name to define it.

[1] https://networkcultures.org/unlikeus/resources/articles/what...

Re: Dino: An open-source application for XMPP messaging

#63

Post by seba_dos1 »

jandrese wrote: post #22
SamWhited wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds like a server design problem, not a client problem. XMPP is stateful, so it is harder to have a distributed server but it's also doing something more complicated than eg. serving a document like HTTP. If you use a server like ejabberd and a proxy layer you can easily do geographic distribution of the server, or at least, with no more difficulty than any other protocol.

It bled over into clients too. You would tell your client to connect to "google.com" and it was hardcoded to connect to "xmpp.google.com", with no option to choose a different server. If you had multiple domains that you wanted to connect the servers would also default to xmpp.other.domain. If you wanted to connect to test.my.domain to test2.my.domain you were SOL. In a lab environment you could hack it with local DN…

Google Talk never really followed any standard way of specifying the server that handled the domain. This is a non-issue these days.

Re: Dino: An open-source application for XMPP messaging

#64

Post by rakoo »

While I've been a believer of XMPP and still believes it has a place, I have to admit that it doesn't have the appeal it once has. Now the IM protocol du jour is Matrix, which might or might not know the same fate; who knows. And another one might come later, and there are already others today that exist and are widely used.

I think it's high time we had a concerted effort to have one great UI (probably per platform), and allow all protocol enthusiasts implement the specifics of their own choosing. It's fair to say that at this point the requirements for a "modern" UI are known, and while not all protocols may be up to the task, a very high percentage can be implemented in the most famous ones.

Re: Dino: An open-source application for XMPP messaging

#65

Post by tomstockmail »

markandrewj wrote: post #56
asnyder wrote: post #29

Looks like a nice project, but why wouldn't one use http://pidgin.im , which also supports XMPP and as far as I know is pretty solid, works well, and is also cross-platform? What advantages does this have over Pidgin?

If you are interested in Pidgin, the lead developer has a Twitch stream (rw_grim). He is always open to ideas, and onboarding new contributors. There is a new version of Pidgin being written that significantly improves the user, and developer, experience. If you check out the stream, you could get some swag too (I have some Pidgin stickers). That said, I am also interested in Dino, and supporting other projects. It's…

The dev is also active over on reddit.com/r/pidgin and the website has a link to the discord as well, ironically enough.

Re: Dino: An open-source application for XMPP messaging

#67

Post by jandrese »

ryukafalz wrote: post #43
jandrese wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It bled over into clients too. You would tell your client to connect to "google.com" and it was hardcoded to connect to "xmpp.google.com", with no option to choose a different server. If you had multiple domains that you wanted to connect the servers would also default to xmpp.other.domain. If you wanted to connect to test.my.domain to test2.my.domain you were SOL. In a lab environment you could hack it with local DN…

> You would tell your client to connect to "google.com" and it was hardcoded to connect to "xmpp.google.com", with no option to choose a different server. >If you had multiple domains that you wanted to connect the servers would also default to xmpp.other.domain. This seems strange. XMPP has SRV records specified for discovery of the client endpoint, so the "correct" thing for a client to do would be to look up the x…

It's what Jabber used to do back in the day at the least.

Re: Dino: An open-source application for XMPP messaging

#68

Post by inanutshellus »

upbeatlinux wrote: post #50
ForHackernews wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Pidgin OTR plugin worked really well over many years, but I haven't used it in a while: https://otr.cypherpunks.ca/

Yes, OTR worked well for me years ago. Although IIRC Pidgin also stored network credentials in plain-text file. Maybe that has been resolved in the past 10 years?

Pidgin intentionally stores them in plain text. The logic, I believe, is that "light encryption" is worse than no encryption since it gives a false sense of security.

So rather than a reversible cypher they leave it plain so that their users will freak out and /not/ share their files with folk and will properly lock down their creds file.

Re: Dino: An open-source application for XMPP messaging

#69

Post by dragontamer »

rakoo wrote: post #64

While I've been a believer of XMPP and still believes it has a place, I have to admit that it doesn't have the appeal it once has. Now the IM protocol du jour is Matrix, which might or might not know the same fate; who knows. And another one might come later, and there are already others today that exist and are widely used. I think it's high time we had a concerted effort to have one great UI (probably per platform)…

I feel like the focus of XMPP puts the effort in the wrong place. FreeNode IRC is still used because community effort to maintain the channels. Similarly, subreddits live or die by community moderation.

An effort that simplifies channel maintenance, like how easy it is to open a new Subreddit (the #1 portal, a static website URL representing your community identity) is the most important step forward.

Once you establish a www identity for your community, then and only then can you discuss community chat.

For example, lobster.rs community meets on IRC FreeNode, a protocol established on their about page.

------

The reason Reddit, Facebook, and Discord are popular, is because of the easy web-based onboarding process for new users. There are also web guis which make it easy to start new communities.

Support the WWW first, and users will come (as long as the onboarding process is as easy as competitors)

Re: Dino: An open-source application for XMPP messaging

#70

Post by BlueTemplar »

rakoo wrote: post #64

While I've been a believer of XMPP and still believes it has a place, I have to admit that it doesn't have the appeal it once has. Now the IM protocol du jour is Matrix, which might or might not know the same fate; who knows. And another one might come later, and there are already others today that exist and are widely used. I think it's high time we had a concerted effort to have one great UI (probably per platform)…

While it's worrying that Matrix uses the layer 7 HTTP (does it make it "layer 8"?) compared to XMPP's potentially more efficient use of layer 4 TCP, it's still better than the closed alternatives... (And JSON > XML !)
Post reply on HN