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

151–160 of 199 posts

Re: WhatsApp and most alternatives share the same problem

#151

Post by Seirdy »

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.

There are measures we can take: provider and implementation diversity should curb this. Not everyone is "grandma" so not everyone needs to use a client for "grandma".

I wrote about this in detail: https://seirdy.one/2021/02/23/keeping-platforms-open.html

Re: WhatsApp and most alternatives share the same problem

#152

Post by amelius »

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…

Yes. Also we should stop preferring X only because it is slightly more convenient or shiny, when there are alternatives which are better in more important ways.

Re: WhatsApp and most alternatives share the same problem

#153

Post by toUser5 »

To most users Matrix is a walled garden under computer expert influence

The only difference between any of them to the end user is some are privately funded/operated

As technical inventions they’re all black boxes most users won’t understand

Am I to audit all the code to make sure some Matrix node hasn’t figured me out?

All blog posts like this do is reiterate for me that as clever as their understanding of a particular abstraction, programmers are opinionated humans looking to manipulate based upon the perception their insight is somehow better, like everyone else

Someone somewhere can figure out who you are because you merely use a technology. It can all be traced back to a purchase or a manufacturer or a radio tower

Pretending software can hide physical reality is weirdly cognitive dissonant

Re: WhatsApp and most alternatives share the same problem

#155

Post by nathias »

joepie91_ wrote: post #43
newswasboring wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the general UX issues aside. I think those are the issues, at least according to the op. I mean, anyone can write a chat app. That tech has existed for ever. Putting the right UX on it is the hard problem good chat apps need to solve.

Anyone can write a centralized chat app. Building a federated chat app is an order of magnitude more difficult, and is still a largely unexplored space.

actually chat apps started decentralized, irc was a protocol and it was by far the best communication tool

Re: WhatsApp and most alternatives share the same problem

#156

Post by ergl »

ezst wrote: post #134
m4lvin wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

> Your link [1] is actually the answer to/against moxie by Daniel Gultsch. True, I meant to move the reference at the end of the sentence rather than linking the two as initially planned, ended-up doing half of that. > There is also a live talk by Moxie at 36C3 IIRC, that's the one he didn't like to be ridiculed over and asked the organizers to take down.

> that's the one he didn't like to be ridiculed over and asked the organizers to take down.

This is repeated every single time, when the reality is that Moxie asked the organizers _in advance_ not to record the talk[0]:

> I just prefer to present something as part of a conversation that’s happening in a place, rather than a webinar that I’m broadcasting forever to the world. I have less faith in the internet as a place where a conversation can happen, and the timelessness of it decontextualizes.

[0]: https://twitter.com/moxie/status/1211427007596154881

Post reply on HN