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

WhatsApp and most alternatives share the same problem

stuker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 199 posts

Re: WhatsApp and most alternatives share the same problem

#71

Post by capableweb »

mvanbaak wrote: post #34
capableweb wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with statements like "I happily use Matrix but my grandma will not, ever, not in this world" is that Matrix is more of a protocol than anything. So of course, your gradma would never use HTTP, but since browsers are now user friendly enough, everyone is using HTTP indirectly. Same can (will? Might?) happen with Matrix, where a popular applications get written on top of Matrix, and users don't even need to…

And when a popular application get written, it will become the next walled garden. whatsapp uses xmpp. whatsapp became a closed system. PerfectClientXInTheFuture uses matrix. PerfectClientXInTheFuture becomes a closed system. Why? Because that way they can make more money. It's sad, but true.

Whatsapp got bought by Facebook which changed their strategy 100%. They used to ask users for a $1/year payment or something like that, but after being bought by Facebook, they now focus on just providing data to Facebook. I think one of the founders also have openly gone out and regretted the sale to Facebook - "At the end of the day, I sold my company. I sold my users’ privacy to a larger benefit. I made a choice and a compromise. I live with that every day." - https://www.fastcompany.com/90242892/whatsapp-cofounder-expl...

If we manage to keep the governance of the client and protocol open and participatory, I'm sure we can have clients/protocols that survive for longer. Just like we did with email and IRC in the past.

Re: WhatsApp and most alternatives share the same problem

#72

Post by GekkePrutser »

ezst wrote: post #5

I wanted to like this piece for calling Signal for what it is: WhatsApp with better marketing (with a lot of security and privacy backed by obscurity), but if everyone is jumping ship from WhatsApp out of data syphoning concerns, I'm not sure that Matrix's insistance on replicating and distributing as much metadata as possible across its nodes is much better. The end game is probably P2P with "dumb" servers doing lit…

Could you elaborate more about Matrix's metadata distribution? What exactly is being distributed and when? I'd like to see that if you have it as I wasn't aware of this.

PS: I'm not trying to contradict you here, on the contrary. I'd like to deep dive into it as it is indeed a big issue. If Matrix really takes off (which I hope it does) I would want to avoid dataminers just federating to it and grabbing data that way.

Of course some metadata would need to be able to be shared for the federated network to function. I understand that too.

Re: WhatsApp and most alternatives share the same problem

#73

Post by m4lvin »

ezst wrote: post #17
cassepipe wrote: post #10

The reason why Signal is not an open protocol like email has been argumented by Signal creator Moxie before (can't find the article please help). It has pros (evolution is faster and thus it's easier to compete with proprietary solutions) and cons (single point of failure) and Signal devs are well aware of that. We should stop acting like Matrix and Signal are competing with each other. I happily use Matrix but my gr…

Moxie's argument can be found in its essay "the ecosystem is moving"[1], which is highly fallacious. Moxie's Signal is about control and building for himself the same kind of monopoly as others currently enjoy. You can find evidence of that through the libresignal issue tracker on GitHub where he rationalizes barring access to 3rd party clients or servers[2]. He sees federation as the technically superior approach (a…

Your link [1] is actually the answer to/against moxie by Daniel Gultsch. Please be fair and first give the original article so people can make up their own mind:

https://signal.org/blog/the-ecosystem-is-moving/

There is also a live talk by Moxie at 36C3: https://app.media.ccc.de/v/36c3-11086-the_ecosystem_is_movin...

Re: WhatsApp and most alternatives share the same problem

#74

Post by EGreg »

CJefferson wrote: post #11

I really sympathise with this point of view, but when it comes to messaging with family and friends, I just don't really care. Matrix seems to want to be an IRC replacement rather than a one-to-one / small-group chat app. That's fine, but often not what I want. Teaching my mother in law to use Signal: Install. Accept permissions. Choose a PIN. I can send you messages. You can see your friends who already use Signal.…

“I just don’t really care” sums up why all well-meaning attempts I have seen to switch Web 2.0 (the social Web) to open source have failed.

Web 1.0 has Wordpress, Magento and a slew of other things. But for Web 2.0 people expect a growing number of real-time services, slick and easy to use, these days they all added audio chatrooms and video calls etc. Everything has to be super reliable, etc.

It would take years to build a suite of components (chatrooms, events, managing subscriptions and notifications etc.) that could rival Facebook / Telegram / WhatsApp.

I would like to think we did it at Qbix. But we are still playing catch-up to the big boys.

User adoption will only come when something is good enough to be used as what’s currently out there.

But once it comes, it has so many advantages: host where you want, configure components how you want.

If you’re interested, look at the links in my profile.

Re: WhatsApp and most alternatives share the same problem

#75

Post by CJefferson »

GekkePrutser wrote: post #58
CJefferson wrote: post #11

I really sympathise with this point of view, but when it comes to messaging with family and friends, I just don't really care. Matrix seems to want to be an IRC replacement rather than a one-to-one / small-group chat app. That's fine, but often not what I want. Teaching my mother in law to use Signal: Install. Accept permissions. Choose a PIN. I can send you messages. You can see your friends who already use Signal.…

If your mother in law can't even pick a username and password, how will she shop on Amazon, sign up with Google, book a flight? Most other mobile apps require you to sign up for an account too. And it bypasses the big problem of having to use your phone number (though you can already add it if you want for people to easily find you!) In regards to the UX of Elements, I think it's not great either but it's not the onl…

Amazon doesn't have a username, it uses your email. Also, it doesn't give you a choice of "which amazon to sign up with", with 3 options.

Re: WhatsApp and most alternatives share the same problem

#76

Post by m4lvin »

ezst wrote: post #23
cassepipe wrote: post #10

The reason why Signal is not an open protocol like email has been argumented by Signal creator Moxie before (can't find the article please help). It has pros (evolution is faster and thus it's easier to compete with proprietary solutions) and cons (single point of failure) and Signal devs are well aware of that. We should stop acting like Matrix and Signal are competing with each other. I happily use Matrix but my gr…

Also, for what's worth, my grandma uses XMPP just fine...

+1

Also, "grandma" is an annoying cliche/placeholder. No law says that young males understand any kind of app or sign-up process immediately.

Re: WhatsApp and most alternatives share the same problem

#77

Post by spurgu »

dpatterbee wrote: post #35
CJefferson wrote: post #11

I really sympathise with this point of view, but when it comes to messaging with family and friends, I just don't really care. Matrix seems to want to be an IRC replacement rather than a one-to-one / small-group chat app. That's fine, but often not what I want. Teaching my mother in law to use Signal: Install. Accept permissions. Choose a PIN. I can send you messages. You can see your friends who already use Signal.…

I get what you're saying, but you seem to just be criticising element, not matrix. All of these are temporary problems which can be overcome with more time to hone the user experience. I would love to see another company come along and make another matrix-based chat app to compete with element, hopefully that would result in them both getting better much quicker.

Element has a sad amount of bugs/inconsistencies, even though they're being fixed/improved all the time. Message formatting issues for example between mobile and desktop clients are things that really put me off using it.

I like the protocol, and I love the idea, but it's just nowhere near grandmother (or even mother) level of usability. And it's not nowhere near good enough for someone as anal as me. People in between might not get put off by all the issues though.

Re: WhatsApp and most alternatives share the same problem

#78

Post by CJefferson »

the_duke wrote: post #26
CJefferson wrote: post #11

I really sympathise with this point of view, but when it comes to messaging with family and friends, I just don't really care. Matrix seems to want to be an IRC replacement rather than a one-to-one / small-group chat app. That's fine, but often not what I want. Teaching my mother in law to use Signal: Install. Accept permissions. Choose a PIN. I can send you messages. You can see your friends who already use Signal.…

> Matrix seems to want to be an IRC replacement rather than a one-to-one / small-group chat app I don't know where you get that impression. Matrix / Element works great for 1-1 and small group chats, the general UX issues aside.

When I go to 'group chat', rather than show me my friends I could group chat with, my screen is filled with "channels" I have no interest in.

When I first signed up, I couldn't figure out (quickly) how to talk to anyone I know, just how to join channels full of people I don't know (which to me is like IRC).

Re: WhatsApp and most alternatives share the same problem

#79

Post by cheph »

tchalla wrote: post #51
cheph wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am heavily against switching from WhatsApp to Signal, but you have very good points, and I think Matrix should take note of these points. Technically Matrix can yield a very similar user experience to Signal, but there has to be more focus on actually doing it if it wants to be considered as a serious player in the same space as WhatsApp and Signal.

> I am heavily against switching from WhatsApp to Signal, I'm curious - what are your arguments against the switch?

I think the article sums it up fairly well. Signal to me does not solve the fundamental problems inherent to WhatsApp, additionally it suffers from some of the more serious ones I have with WhatsApp (tied to phone number) and brings some new ones (no web client).

And the places where Signal improves on WhatsApp relies entirely on trust which is what WhatsApp relied on until it broke trust.

I would prefer to use Matrix/XMPP instead of Signal and WhatsApp.

Re: WhatsApp and most alternatives share the same problem

#80

Post by ppf »

iamben wrote: post #45
ppf wrote: post #42

They don't mention the other issue - Whatsapp and similar are, if anything, the worst form of social media. You have shallow conversations that dribble your attention away throughout your entire day, yet you have not gained any meaningful interaction.

But on the flip side I have shallow conversations that dribble my attention away throughout my entire day. The first time I worked for myself - pre social media - was really, really lonely. This pandemic and lockdown is really, really lonely. I can silence my phone, I can turn the screen away from me. I can focus when I want to. But it's truly a blessing knowing I have WhatsApp groups with friends just bantering away…

That should frighten you. If Whatsapp went away tomorrow, would you have any friends?
Post reply on HN