That would be pretty amazing. However, I highly appreciate the actual milestone, as it was one of the most discussed points during the past years. We now have an E2E encrypted messenger that allows anonymous usage AND is user friendly. And in addition the servers are located in Europe. What else could we wish for?
@edi Well, I think this approach is _pretty_ interesting, assuming they also sell app licenses directly (without Google Play dependencies). So you would be required to buy one but you could then use an open or f-droid build without having to trust proprietary packages for that and just restore your backed-up data in there.
Well, I should've been more precise in my wording, I assumed that the readers find out themselves reading the blog post. You're right, my toot itself leaves it open for wrong conclusions. Thanks for the addition.
As long as there is the feature and usability gap between XMPP and other messengers, you have to live with it. Your type of communication is what it makes difficult for us to get the billions of WhatsApp away from Facebook.
@tpheine @sesivany the main gap stems from having the capital to run pr campaigns like the one you fell for. do not call it "open source" if the server side is not. my communication was to you and for people considering alternatives - and even so, i think that what we need is to actually be razor sharp critical and absolutely clear and blunt, instead of accepting corporations and relaying their propaganda
Why isn't Conversations been backed like Threema then, so that it can be as feature and usability rich like all other messengers? Threema started years later then XMPP and even with the support of Google, GMX, web.de etc, back in the days it allowed a startup from scratch named WhatsApp to become the biggest thread of privacy. So, again, why isn't XMPP the leader and backed with millions of cash?
@tpheine @sesivany because capitalism. because companies have profit as their number one goal and profit comes from controlling the communication system. controlling the server is a straightforward way to exclude and monetize, so that is what they do. google actually started with #xmpp for gchat and then cut it off when enough people were lured inside, benefiting from the complacency of the people who should know better
@tpheine @sesivany of course i answered. conversations/xmpp let anyone run servers, companies can't maintain control to extract profit, so they don't "back it", as you say. they will only finance the technology that gives them leverage to extract rent. most it people work for a living, under company orders that tell them to build walled gardens. when they work for the commons, they build better stuff based on standards like xmpp and matrix and free software for the end devices.
I didn't ask for companies, I asked for Conversations/XMPP backed by the people. Like Threema, that is backed by people. (Before its collaboration). Why is there no Foundation like there is for Linux or Mozilla or Nextcloud whatever successful Open Source project? Why isn't Daniel been paid to work full-time on Conversations to make it the best?
@tpheine @sesivany try to come up with answers to your question. where do foundations get money? from companies, partnerships, sponsorships, etc. threema is a company, for profit (can't see how you can say it's backed by people) and they'll only have my attention when they release all code and federate with others. otoh, matrix is a protocol, so multiple implementations for clients and servers are possible and exist (and there is a matrix foundation and companies that provide hosting services)
@tpheine @sesivany what company would have any reason to pay Daniel to make conversations and xmpp better? as per matrix model, Daniel would have to build his own services company to be able to work and improve on it. if would like to do that, he'd need capital, which he'd only have from banks or venture capitalists if he could promise returns, which is hard without having control. matrix and element are trying that, but face great opposition from facebooks and such, much better financed
@tpheine @sesivany i remember a time in which it was unfathomable to conceive of an encyclopedia or an OS built by people in a distributed fashion and that these could be better than those of bigcorps. we already won, many times. we have solid ground, with compilers, OSes, languages, vast amounts of user software. there are just no definite victories under capitalism. nor defeats.
Threema is a company, true. But the company gets money by people purchasing the apps. Not like WhatsApp that sells your data. And you're also correct when saying that there are loads of foundations. My point is, that none of them was/is able to provide a real competition to the "companies". And therefore I keep asking: why don't we, the tech and privacy advocates, fund a real competitive - and usable by non-techs - messenger? No, we fund hundreds of them.
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!