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

Matrix 2.0: The Future of Matrix

matrix.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 283 posts

Re: Matrix 2.0: The Future of Matrix

#131

Post by xorcist »

amstan wrote: post #74
xorcist wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it really that simple though? Jabber tried to be smart about which device to ring, and sometimes someone ended up with a missed notification. I always felt gutting that complexity and ring all instead would have been the more robust way.

So you consider your phone vibrating loudly on your desk for every recieved message while you're actively chatting and reading the same message on your desktop a correct implementation?

Well, it's not great, but could be a viable solution until a scheme is devised that is guaranteed not to lose any notifications, which would be worse.

Re: Matrix 2.0: The Future of Matrix

#132

Post by _rs »

Arathorn wrote: post #58
em-bee wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

element still has serious usability issues that need to be fixed before i can get friends or family on board. the way threads are displayed in the browser versions makes them hard to follow. in our hackerspace, where many are tech minded people, i see regular complaints about that. scrollback to unread messages often fails. i have never had another chat application where that was a problem. this should just work. the…

Sounds like you’re talking about Element Web or Desktop here. On Mobile, we just rewrote the app as Element X and it addresses almost all your concerns (other than per-room nicks, although ironically Element Web does have that today - try the /roomname command). Having got Element X out the door, my attention at least is going to swing back to Element Web. In terms of encryption disasters, we are about to switch Elem…

Element X is great except for the lack of history, once that's added it'll change to my daily driver. I very often search my chat history and reference things going back months

Re: Matrix 2.0: The Future of Matrix

#134

Post by Aerbil313 »

sneak wrote: post #61
neilv wrote: post #15

Thoughts on how this will get us towards when libre software privacy&security type people are ready to advise friends to move to Matrix for personal communication? (To be clear, the platform has to be all open source and open standards, actually decentralized, guided by those principles -- not an effectively proprietary play even if nominally open. For example, you should be able to get all the same functionality wit…

One of the big problems as I see it is that all notifications on iOS must be proxied via APNS and those can only be sent by the app publisher, so all home servers must send their iOS notifications to Vector (the Element publishers) to be sent to APNS and on to an iPhone or iPad. This is a centralized point for surveillance of metadata. I also do not know how much information is actually contained in the notification…

Then everyone should just roll out their own app… this seems like an EU-regulation-needed situation.

Re: Matrix 2.0: The Future of Matrix

#135

Post by smashah »

amstan wrote: post #84
smashah wrote: post #80

Matrix is great but when is the tech industry going to deal with the fact that many, if not all, bridges are against the respective services' ToS and subsequently put the developers of those bridges under legal risk? Whatsapp has already sent legal threats to multiple bridge-component level project maintainers without any recourse.

My Facebook bridge constantly locks up my account. [1] [1] https://github.com/mautrix/facebook/issues/236

I strongly believe users should be able to automate and interact with their accounts through whatever clients they wish however I think blocks/bans/technical countermeasures is fair game.

Count yourself lucky for not having an undeterminable, unfightable legal threat over your head from a $800bn mega corp.

Re: Matrix 2.0: The Future of Matrix

#136

Post by infogulch »

beepbooptheory wrote: post #111
amatecha wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, that's great for me, but doesn't help me when everyone else is using the hosted stuff :)

Ok, I'll bite, what even could be the alternative here then? You want something without big funders, totally OSS, and extremely friendly for grandmas? Feels like one of those "you can only pick two" type things to me, but would love to learn that's not the case.

Also: 1. Mainstream enough for grandma. 2. No public hosts, you are required to self host it. Totally reasonable I don't see why this is so hard. /s

Re: Matrix 2.0: The Future of Matrix

#137

Post by cyberax »

self_awareness wrote: post #19

How Matrix decentralisation is an improvement over Jabber's decentralisation? (disclaimer: I have no knowledge about neither spec, I'm not suggesting Jabber was better)

Jabber core protocol (XMPP) is kinda like SMTP. It deals with transmission of messages between two peers. Just like with SMTP, you can federate servers, so they can exchange messages between each other.

And the similarities don't end here. XMPP doesn't have built-in support for encryption (apart from the basic TLS encryption for the transport layer), it doesn't have support for message archiving and chat history syncing, there is no support for group chats, and so on.

A lot of this functionality is added as extensions (e.g. group chats are XEP-045), but this simply caused a lot of fragmentation in the ecosystem. So you could never rely on your client (or server) interoperating with other clients properly.

Audio calls and video also never really worked well. Google tried to push them by releasing libjingle in 2006 (!!!) but it was kinda ignored by everyone.

Re: Matrix 2.0: The Future of Matrix

#138

Post by preya2k »

Arathorn wrote: post #126
preya2k wrote: post #102

Once more, Kudos to Arathorn/Matthew (the head of Matrix/Element) taking the time to answer most Hacker News comments, as he mostly does for all Matrix-related HN threads. It's really nice to see him answer in a calm and mostly objective tone while people are blaming him for shortcomings and problems of all the different Matrix-related software projects. Admitting to failures and problems that Matrix definitely has,…

thanks :) sorry for monopolising the thread, but it's too tempting when I have the answers to hand, for better or worse...

Looking forward to your talk tomorrow in Berlin.

Re: Matrix 2.0: The Future of Matrix

#139

Post by tptacek »

Arathorn wrote: post #93
tptacek wrote: post #49

Just a question, I haven't been paying attention, but where is Matrix on resolving the Nebuchadnezzar vulnerabilities, and is the project still tracking towards switching to MLS instead of Olm/Megolm?

The main remaining Nebuchadnezzar issue is mitigating server-controlled group membership. The first step has been to kill off the 1st gen E2EE implementations, which were responsible for the implementation vulns found by RHUL - and we should hopefully conclude that next week by moving everything into the matrix-rust-sdk crypto crate implmentation: https://github.com/vector-im/element-web/issues/21972#issuec... is the…

INCORRECT. The messier your situation is, the better the podcast will be. You're still in my top 3 subjects for us to do an episode on. I'm rooting for you! But also for sound messaging cryptography. So I'm one of your most complicated supporters. :)

Re: Matrix 2.0: The Future of Matrix

#140

Post by Arathorn »

wkat4242 wrote: post #129

There's no web version of element X though? It's what I use most of the time. I'll try the Android app anyway, I've been having a really annoying bug with the normal one anyway that hasn't been fixed for a year. So perhaps X doesn't have it.

Element X works pretty well on macOS as a desktop client if you have an Apple Silicon Mac. Otherwise, the big Element Web rework is yet to happen.

On Android, I can almost guarantee your bug will be fixed: Element X Android doesn’t share any code with Element Android at all, as far as I know (given the former is mainly written in Rust, and the latter is all Kotlin)

Post reply on HN