First impressions of Matrix: frequent lag spikes at upwards of 10+ seconds and now the server is just straight up dead

Please just use IRC, people ;_;

@sir Nah, use XMPP instead of IRC. It doesn’t need a fraction of the resources of Matrix while offering all the same features. Only iOS clients is where it’s severely lacking.

@sir Not a single thing in the IRC protocol is better…

@js every single thing in the IRC protocol is better. XMPP can go suck an egg


@sir Wow. So many well presented, factual arguments… Very educated opinion!

@js well let's start with the X in the name, then.

@sir What’s wrong with it being eXtensible? This just means it’s extensible without hacks. IRC is only extensible via hacks. Just look at the CTCP mess.

@js it's more about the XML than the eXtensible. But eXtensibility is generally not desired in my chat protocol.

@sir Except if you look at the JSON used by Matrix, it ended up being very similar to XML. As soon as you add namespaces, you end up with something like XML. At which point you might as well use something with native namespace support, so that you can hä existing parsers instead of building another layer on top.

@js appealing to Matrix's design to convince me XMPP is good isn't going to get you anywhere

@sir I‘m asking you what the alternative is.

@sir That's even worse. No multi-line. Using control characters to hack in features like CTCP, ACTION and colors. No persistence. Can't receive messages when offline. No multi-client support. No end-to-end encryption. Yeah, waaaay better protocol…

>no multi-line
feature, not a bug
>CTCP is a hack
this is stretching the truth, CTCP is fine
>no end to end encryption

The rest of your problems with it are solved with bouncers.

@sir OTR does not work with multi device. So if you use a bouncer, you can no longer use OTR.

@js what? Just take your private keys with you

@sir Well, when two devices are connected at the same time, all hell breaks loose.

@sir Sharing my trusted key on my computer with my untrusted mobile device sounds like a brilliant idea…

@js well how the fuck else are you going to decrypt messages if you don't

@sir By having a protocol with proper key management. Then you can decide which devices you trust for what. But that would require a protocol that actually considers it a possibility that someone has more than a single VT420 for all their messaging.

@js I use a VT220, get your newfangled shit outta here

But once the messages are decrypted, the cat's out of the bag. For future messages, you can still rotate keys when you lose your device with OTR.

@js "My phone can't access my bank account!"

"Well, actually, your phone can access your bank account if you give it your bank info"

"Pfft, why would I want an untrusted device like my phone to access my bank account"

@sir It makes sense if the sender can select which devices to trust per message, you know. If I talk about what's for lunch, that I trust my phone for. If I talk about something confidential, I might not.

@js well, in any case, this can be fixed in a backwards-compatible way. Propose improvements to OTR or add a new secure layer over IRC. Don't throw out the baby with the bathwater here.

@sir Hahah, good one. I tried proposing fixes to OTR around 10 years ago. The protocol is completely fucked up, and OTRv3 didn't fix much. It's error reporting is injecting a message into the client that contains *localized* HTML.

@js still, I'd sooner make an OTR replacement than an IRC replacement. I'd be 100% on board with an OTR replacement project and 0% on any IRC replacement

@sir Yup. I tried to make it work in Gajim back in the day. But it turns out errors can happen and you cannot figure them out and thus not properly recover from them. I had to nuke the OTR support from Gajim in the end.

@js this resembles but is not identical to my own list of criticisms of IRC:

Sign in to participate in the conversation

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!