Live data from Hacker News

IRC.com Bought by London Trust Media, Pledges an IRC Revival

irc.com

371–380 of 397 posts

Re: IRC.com Bought by London Trust Media, Pledges an IRC Revival

#371
post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IRC is dying because no one invests months and years of code into server protocol extensions and client user interface for non-engineer users. Write an IRCv3 scrollback and search extension, and you’ll win the hearts of millions.

> IRC is dying because no one invests months and years of code into server protocol extensions and client user interface for non-engineer users. I never understood this sentiment. In the '90s and the previous decade, I corresponded with many people over IRC and usenet who were definitely "non-engineer users". What changed in the last 10 years to make many people believe that one has to have a technical/engineering ba…

It's probably just relative. I would think the proportion on IRC is now more technical than ever before.

Twenty years ago, you would need to know where to plug a cable in to even have a computer turn on. For better or worse, the barrier for entry these days is a lot lower.

IRC has remained relatively the same while other services like Facebook or even MSN Messenger promised the world.

I don't agree that IRC is dead. It will continue to outlast many companies.

Re: IRC.com Bought by London Trust Media, Pledges an IRC Revival

#372
post #330

Long live IRC There will always be new platforms like slack, discord, gitter, and whatever. IRC was and still is great. IRC is simple, its text, its stable. Its simple to program on and a lot can be done above it. IRC is open. The basis of old internet protocols are simple, open and powerful Email, IRC, HTML, FTP And as the article points out, irc has no face. IRC was a time people had to ask for a picture. Different…

Have you looked at Matrix.org? It's essentially the "modern IRC" people are asking for. I strongly suggest giving it a chance.

I'm being semi facetious, but what does Matrix offer that I'm not able to get from my 24/7 tmux+irssi virtual private instance? Please don't say more notifications or addictiveness.

Re: IRC.com Bought by London Trust Media, Pledges an IRC Revival

#373
post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm an average person (with 17 years of professional programming career behind me). I sense a contradiction in this statement...

You only sense the contradiction because you share a common HN delusion: that you are above average unique non-normal tech bro über man. This delusion is what stops such people from understanding why Slack/Viber/WhatsApp/iMessage/WeChat etc. won and XMPP and IRC lost.

What perplexes me is that there are now even more competing messaging services than ever before. This suggests to me that none have won.

Re: IRC.com Bought by London Trust Media, Pledges an IRC Revival

#374

Long live IRC There will always be new platforms like slack, discord, gitter, and whatever. IRC was and still is great. IRC is simple, its text, its stable. Its simple to program on and a lot can be done above it. IRC is open. The basis of old internet protocols are simple, open and powerful Email, IRC, HTML, FTP And as the article points out, irc has no face. IRC was a time people had to ask for a picture. Different…

Do you connect with a 1200 baud acoustic coupler modem or are you average person who uses a fibre connection and off-the-shelf router? Do you take a horse and cart to work or are you an average person who drives a car or catches the train? Do you mill your own bread, or are you an average person who eats machine milled and produced bread? Do you pump and sanitize your own water, or are you an average person who turns…

> Do you take a horse and cart to work or are you an average person who drives a car or catches the train?

Neither thanks. I ride a bicycle with an internal gear hub (IGHs, which are a technology that are over a century old,and put modern derailers to shame). I sometimes also walk.

Newer and more horsepower is not always better.

IRC being awful doesn't automatically make current alternatives not awful. I use IRC within my expectations, just as I do with other services.

Just because I expect a certain demographic in IRC doesn't mean I exclude myself from interacting with other ones too.

Without engaging the parent comment directly, the IRC user demographic is no longer average but that's okay. Average is also okay - there's room in this world for both.

Facebook and Twitter though, are trash as far as time sinks go.

Re: IRC.com Bought by London Trust Media, Pledges an IRC Revival

#375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You make it sound harder than it is. Server-wise you want either ejabberd or prosody for the latest features. Yes, you need to set up a server once and read some docs, as with every self-hosted service. And if you don't care about encryption enough to read about it you can just enforce TLS for client-to-server and server-to-server connections. On the desktop, Gajim (win/linux/bsd/mac) supports all of the XEPs I menti…

> Server-wise you want either > You need to set up > clients for iOS too [nope, no clients beyond the very basic abandoned ones — dmitriid] So.... Why would I want any of that? To feel "not-normal" "above average", as this entire thread seems to imply? > stolen misused yada yada Let's leave these scary strories to the kids, shall we? We're supposed to be all grown ups here.

I don't understand why you pretend to be obtuse but it's clear you've already made your mind why.

Re: IRC.com Bought by London Trust Media, Pledges an IRC Revival

#376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it feel a bit biased when you say that IRC could have a protocol bump, but you wouldn't make the same modifications to hide pictures in Mattermost. Additionally not being able to share images as a feature? I guess everyone will do the three step upload to imgur first. In my world - if I could get away with less different clients I would. It makes it a nightmare to support.

> Additionally not being able to share images as a feature? I guess everyone will do the three step upload to imgur first. That's a feature for me. If I wanted to be constantly barraged with images, I would have stayed using Facebook and Twitter. People on IRC posting imgur links gives me the opportunity to accept or decline (usually based on their reputation, the channel's response, or my boredom). With other social…

What's the problem? Just setup client to hide images unless you click the link provided - Slack have it, Discord have it. Works exactly the same way, no 3rd party involved. I'm sick when I have to go to imgur to open image and load tons of scripts and see other stuff completely unrelevant. You think imgur doesn't live for profit?

Re: IRC.com Bought by London Trust Media, Pledges an IRC Revival

#377
The biggest problem, and biggest fail of IRC. It is too low level and requires people to write scripts when they need anything else beyond simple text message.

I am torn apart here, because I really do like hacking things. The issue is - most people don't. They just want to use it, and they want to use it consistently - no matter the platform, the client, the server they are connecting to. And I totally understand that. More of it, I also understand that if you fail to provide this consistency your service have failed in the design phase and will never get widespread usage.

The sooner we, tech savvy people, understand that, the sooner we'll be able to deliver a successful open services that actually stand a chance with their closed counterpart.

So obviously, give people way to hack, but you must to:

* Design a rich protocol covering needs of the biggest target possible while allowing optionally disable features. Channels history, disappearing messages, embedded media, text formatting, emoji, stickers, web hooks, API for bots, you name it. The protocol must cover most of them, so there is no need to write scripts anymore, unless you need something niche.

* Design a strict spec for the clients, so all of them must keep to the spec, or they fail to be part of the service. And this is critical - do no allow client to behave differently and have a missing features.

* Design clients so they are trivial to use. They must be usable out of box and all (most) of the features must be enabled after installation. Necessary steps to start using it (connection, channels, etc.) should be reduced to minimum and intuitive.

* Keep a community of server and client developers so they can share info and be able to build uniform solution for the users.

* And probably most important - promote the service. And do promote it heavily, unless you want to design something niche, which, I guess, is not what we are talking here.

I've used IRC for years in the past. It was great, I do admit - not anymore. Today I require at least few formatting options (bold, inline code, block code) and no 3rd party tools needed to get anything else work properly. I have no time to hack things I need to use. I would rather spend my time to hack things I like. IRC is just a tool to communicate, I want to use it, not hack it. I loathe to jump here and there to accomplish tasks that should be done within a second with one click.

The biggest problem I observe with many things in the industry is - made by devs for devs. Never for average Joe. Average Joe have no idea about keeping your session attached so you don't loose nick, logs, etc. Neither he cares about that stuff. And honestly - the older I get, the less time I have for this kind of stuff as well. Just make it work or face the failure.

Re: IRC.com Bought by London Trust Media, Pledges an IRC Revival

#378
post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The basis of old internet protocols are simple, open and powerful > Email, IRC, HTML, FTP These protocols are anything but simple. “Be liberal in what you accept” was a huge mistake we’re still paying for. E-mail effectively can’t be made private. There’s lots of room for improvement in open protocols. (Start by not making them text-based, please.)

> E-mail effectively can’t be made private. It definitely can be both in transit and when stored.

If you run your own mail server and everyone who sends you mail makes a direct encrypted connection to it, sure. That’s not a solution for most people.

Re: IRC.com Bought by London Trust Media, Pledges an IRC Revival

#379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The basis of old internet protocols are simple, open and powerful > Email, IRC, HTML, FTP These protocols are anything but simple. “Be liberal in what you accept” was a huge mistake we’re still paying for. E-mail effectively can’t be made private. There’s lots of room for improvement in open protocols. (Start by not making them text-based, please.)

Text has a lot of advantages - I know as I had to debug OSI binary protocols - You had to dump it out to a textual representation. unless you had spent years and could read the protocol in its binary form

That’s

- one advantage, not “a lot”

- very slight, because the tool to convert to and from text gets made

- vastly outweighed by the disadvantages

Re: IRC.com Bought by London Trust Media, Pledges an IRC Revival

#380
post #10

I'm interested to see how they manage to convince communities to use their IRC services over competitors like Discord when so many users see Discord as easy, free, trendy, etc. Of course services liks Slack, Telegram, Skype, etc, are also potential competitors in this ecosystem. >IRC Gaming (We're going to have literally hundreds of thousands in cash prizes!) I suppose literally paying users money is one way, but it…

Are there any open source Discord clients? So far, I've refused to try it because the only client Gentoo has is a binary blob.

https://github.com/MitchWeaver/Discline
Post reply on HN