Live data from Hacker News

European Commission Trials Matrix to Replace Teams

euractiv.com

91–100 of 196 posts

Re: European Commission Trials Matrix to Replace Teams

#91
post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Matrix is a decentralised encrypted chat protocol on which you could build something like Zulip, except decentralised and end-to-end encrypted. Element is the actual app being trialled here, which feels more like Slack and/or Signal than Zulip. The point is that you get something you can selfhost while also interoperating with other deployments… while also encrypting the data end-to-end with Signal protocol.

Federation can feel like "just a feature" but the E2E encryption (also in group chats) is a reason for Matrix to exist and a big reason why it's so slow.

"Slow" in what sense? Development? Because I self host a Conduit server and I don't ever notice messages being slow. It would be hard to notice anyway, as in a group chat people usually take some time to type in their responses.

The sync between large groups used to be slow because of amount of data, but Element X and "sliding windows" were rolled out to help with it.

AFAIK, the public Matrix server used to be slow because of a heavy load (I think), but on my self-hosted instance that's not a problem at all.

Re: European Commission Trials Matrix to Replace Teams

#92
post #87
post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Mobile notifications for organizations with up to 10 users Why does the self-hosted edition have this restriction? If the software is truly OSS, the limit could be trivially patched. But this kind of restriction just does not inspire much confidence in the project to be honest.

Because mobile notifications require integration with operators and cost money. This is not about the ones that are pushed over IP, this is about mobile push.

It doesn't require operator involvement, you can just integrate with FCM and APN?

Re: European Commission Trials Matrix to Replace Teams

#93
It's good to start somewhere, but as a reminder, it's the same European Commission that:

1. runs on Microsoft software that it buys from Fujitsu UK that HN crowd knows from the UK Post scandal

2. Has multi-billion euro digital initiatives and a puny single-instance public Gitlab with a handful of shamefully incomplete "projects".

3. Tells everyone that they have their own AI helpers while actually renting LLMs from Azure.

Re: European Commission Trials Matrix to Replace Teams

#94
post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Matrix is a decentralised encrypted chat protocol on which you could build something like Zulip, except decentralised and end-to-end encrypted. Element is the actual app being trialled here, which feels more like Slack and/or Signal than Zulip. The point is that you get something you can selfhost while also interoperating with other deployments… while also encrypting the data end-to-end with Signal protocol.

Federation can feel like "just a feature" but the E2E encryption (also in group chats) is a reason for Matrix to exist and a big reason why it's so slow.

It's so slow because it's so badly designed as a protocol, E2E isn't really the problem (the slowness is roughly equivalent for non-encrypted rooms)

Re: European Commission Trials Matrix to Replace Teams

#95

This does not bode well. Matrix is honestly not good, as someone who has tried to use it. It's slow, janky, often unstable, and poorly standardized. My suggestion: https://threema.com/en/products/work (hosted) or https://zulip.com/ (OSS self-hosted).

When did you try it? Both Matrix the protocol and implementations like Element X have improved immeasurably over the last year or so.

You will always say that.

Re: European Commission Trials Matrix to Replace Teams

#96
post #39

My team started using Matrix/Element after years of frustration with Teams and Slack. It's far from perfect, but using a simple application with no built-in ads, AI, bloat, crap, etc is wonderful. I really hope the EU throws some serious money at them to get the bugs worked out, add some minor features, and clean up the UX enough that an "office normie" can onboard as easily as MS. My dream is that Matrix can do for…

> It's far from perfect, but using a simple application with no built-in ads, AI, bloat, crap, etc is wonderful.

I think there are three main reasons it's not perfect yet:

1. Building both a decentralised open standard (Matrix) at the same time as a flagship implementation (Element) is playing on hard mode: everything has to be specified under an open governance process (https://spec.matrix.org/proposals) so that the broader ecosystem can benefit from it - while in the early years we could move fast and JFDI, the ecosystem grew much faster than we anticipated and very enthusiastically demanded a better spec process. While Matrix is built extensibly with protocol agility to let you experiment at basically every level of the stack (e.g. right now we're changing the format of user IDs in MSC4243, and the shape of room DAGs in MSC4242) in practice changes take at least ~10x longer to land than in a typical proprietary/centralised product. On the plus side, hopefully the end result ends up being more durable than some proprietary thing, but it's certainly a fun challenge.

2. As Matrix project lead, I took the "Element" use case pretty much for granted from 2019-2022: it felt like Matrix had critical mass and usage was exploding; COVID was highlighting the need for secure comms; it almost felt like we'd done most of the hard bits and finishing building out the app was a given. As a result, I started looking at the N-year horizon instead - spending Element's time working on P2P Matrix (arewep2pyet.com) as a long-term solution to Matrix's metadata footprint and to futureproof Matrix against Chat Control style dystopias... or projects like Third Room (https://thirdroom.io) to try to ensure that spatial collaboration apps didn't get centralised and vendorlocked to Meta, or bluesky on Matrix (https://matrix.org/blog/2020/12/18/introducing-cerulean/, before Jay & Paul got the gig and did atproto).

I maintain that if things had continued on the 2019-2022 trajectory then we would have been able to ship a polished Element and do the various "scifi" long-term projects too. But in practice that didn't happen, and I kinda wish that we'd spent the time focusing on polishing the core Element use case instead. Still, better late than never, in 2023 we did the necessary handbrake turn focusing exclusively on the core Element apps (Element X, Web, Call) and Element Server Suite as an excellent helm-based distro. Hopefully the results speak for themselves now (although Element Web is still being upgraded to use the same engine as Element X).

3. Finally, the thing which went wrong in 2022/2023 was not just the impact of the end of ZIPR, but the horrible realisation that the more successful Matrix got... the more incentive there would be for 3rd parties to commercialise the Apache-licensed code that Element had built (e.g. Synapse) without routing any funds to us as the upstream project. We obviously knew this would happen to some extent - we'd deliberately picked Apache to try to get as much uptake as possible. However, I hadn't realised that the % of projects willing to fund the upstream would reduce as the project got more successful - and the larger the available funds (e.g. governments offering million-dollar deals to deploy Matrix for healthcare, education etc) then you were pretty much guaranteed the % of upstream funding would go to zero.

So, we addressed this in 2023 by having to switch Element's work to AGPL, massively shrinking the company, and then doing an open-core distribution in the form of ESS Pro (https://element.io/server-suite/pro) which puts scalability (but not performance), HA, and enterprise features like antivirus, onboarding/offboarding, audit, border gateways etc behind the paywall. The rule of thumb is that if a feature empowers the end-user it goes FOSS; if it empowers the enterprise over the end-user it goes Pro. Thankfully the model seems to be working - e.g. EC is using ESS for this deployment. There's a lot more gory detail in last year's FOSDEM main-stage talk on this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkCKhP1jxdk

Eitherway, the good news is that we think we've figured out how to make this work, things are going cautiously well, and these days all of Element is laser-focused on making the Element apps & servers as good as we possibly can - while also continuing to also improve Matrix, both because we believe the world needs Matrix more than ever, and because without Matrix Element is just another boring silo'd chat app.

The bad news is that it took us a while to figure it all out (and there are still some things still to solve - e.g. abuse on the public Matrix network, finishing Hydra (see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Keu8aE8t08), finishing the Element Web rework, and cough custom emoji). I'm hopeful we'll get here in the end :)

Re: European Commission Trials Matrix to Replace Teams

#97

This does not bode well. Matrix is honestly not good, as someone who has tried to use it. It's slow, janky, often unstable, and poorly standardized. My suggestion: https://threema.com/en/products/work (hosted) or https://zulip.com/ (OSS self-hosted).

Can you be more specific about your criticisms? I have gripes about Matrix, but your assessment doesn't match my experience.

Re: European Commission Trials Matrix to Replace Teams

#98

It's good to start somewhere, but as a reminder, it's the same European Commission that: 1. runs on Microsoft software that it buys from Fujitsu UK that HN crowd knows from the UK Post scandal 2. Has multi-billion euro digital initiatives and a puny single-instance public Gitlab with a handful of shamefully incomplete "projects". 3. Tells everyone that they have their own AI helpers while actually renting LLMs from A…

They also sometimes forget to clean their shoes after walking in from the street.

But at least this thing they will hopefully get right and maybe in the longer term they'll be able to break the lock-in on those other things as well.

Re: European Commission Trials Matrix to Replace Teams

#99
post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because mobile notifications require integration with operators and cost money. This is not about the ones that are pushed over IP, this is about mobile push.

It doesn't require operator involvement, you can just integrate with FCM and APN?

FCM and APN are the operators
Post reply on HN