Like what features are you missing in other clients? What do you mean Proprietary Software? Fluffy Chat is AGPL-3. Did you even search the clients I mentioned? Element is Apache-2. This is all Free Software. The encryption not being as good in Matrix it is known. And they are looking to upgrade it. See my previous message. But aside from that I see Matrix more as a IRC and Discord and Slack alternative. For groups. And what does it mean that Synapse is the most used now? Coversation is the most used Android Client. Does that mean that XMPP is not an open protocol and is only for Conversations? If you want to use Element they are open to changing the captca: If you don't want to like me there is fluffy chat which AGPL-3 and not Catpca. If you are talking about Desktop there are 6 clients to use one of them from Gnome. Plus even three terminal ones and one Emacs client. I have mentioned before the features: First a lot of clients which XMPP lacks. Second ease of use which XMPP lacks. Third stickers, threads, communities and other modern features that people expect for groups from Discord and the likes. Or Voice rooms even. Keep in mind that all of these and more are planned for Matrix. If you go through their github issues. MSavoritias On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 09:08, Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode) wrote: > > > Le 3 août 2020 23:45:11 GMT+02:00, Msavoritias > > a écrit : >> Okay First of all I am going to say once more that I am not talking >> about Riot, Element or anything like that. I am talking about the >> protocol. >> Please read my messages. > > But you're telling us about XMPP on mobile. Have you a functionnal > alternative to Conversations on Android that has the same features ? > > >> Third what I know is that Olm is based on Signal encryption. If you >> say that Singnal encryption is not that good then I am afraid our >> conversation ends here because it is clear you don't know what you >> are >> talking about. That is not to say OMEMO is not good. > OMEMO is based on Signal encryption, known as Axolotl, and is audited > by experts (see ). Then Olm and > Megolm appeared, and Megolm is the most used in order to allow people > to retrieve messages when changing their devices (so no forward > secrecy). >> >> Also Element is functional. Like Conversations. Just like other >> clients >> like Fluffy Chat and Dillo. > Proprietary software is antifeature. > > >> Also I am not talking about Synapse. There are other servers to >> choose >> from. And the higher usage comes at the cost of features which XMPP >> lacks. Personally I find that acceptable. > But Synapse is the most used. > >> >> What do you mean about advocating Google? The youtube widget? > Recatpcha, is a best example. > >> This is not about beauty or anything like that. It is about >> functionality and modern features that I have first hand experienced >> users caring about. > Which features are you talking about ??? > >> MSavoritias >> >> On Sun, Aug 2, 2020 at 01:01, Adrien Bourmault (neox on Freenode) >> > wrote: >>> Matrix is a badly designed protocol (especially the s2s part) and >>> is >>> not more modern than XMPP. In computer science, be young is not >>> always a quality for a protocol, and XMPP has proven many times it >>> was evolutive and reliable. >>> >>> The XSF point of view is different from the Matrix/Vector one : the >>> XSF is a non profit foundation, in the tracks of IETF. They made a >>> protocol in the hope that it will be useful and that's it. You >>> can't >>> say the same for Vector. >>> >>> We shouldn't have that discussion since the company behind the >>> Matrix >>> protocol advocates for non free software, and open source when they >>> want to be popular. >>> >>>> If Conversations are the benchmark for how much behind XMPP is >>>> in > >>>> capabilities that a modern user wants, then I don't know if it can >>>> be > overcomed. >>> >>> I can't understand what do you mean. Conversations is developed by >>> a >>> very small team, practically one person, and you conclude that this >>> app that evolves permanently has already shown all that could be >>> shown ? Excuse me, but at this time there is no client for Matrix >>> as >>> functional as Conversations (since non free software usage or >>> advocacy is for me an anti-feature worst than "lack of stickers") >>> and >>> XMPP server softwares like Ejabberd or Prosody are way more >>> reliable >>> and powerful than Synapse (which is subject to overconsumption I >>> observed). >>> >>> It is clear that you like Matrix very well, but your arguments are >>> wrong and subjective. >>> >>>> In mobile at least there doesn't seem to be enough development >>>> outside > of Conversations. >>> >>> I can't agree. ChatSecure (for iOS) is a really active project and >>> devs of both Conversations and ChatSecure are always in touch, and >>> are XSF members. There are many forks of both, and it provides >>> additionnal choices for people. >>> >>> On mobile, there is only one functionnal Matrix client : Element. >>> And >>> it advocates for non free software, especially Google one. >>> >>>> I know it is pretty popular with privacy folks though. So maybe >>>> it >>>> finds some use there. >>> >>> Have you ever read RMS ? Or listen to him ? Everyone should care >>> about privacy, everyone should encrypt his communications. XMPP's >>> modern encryption (known as OMEMO) is way more secure than >>> Olm/Megolm >>> (because it seems Vector thought that forward secrecy was an >>> anti-feature lol). >>> >>> Do you think the FSF should advocate for that? With all the >>> problems >>> that Vector has, it would be a treason for people who trust the >>> FSF. >>> >>> I can understand you like Element because it has stickers and it is >>> beautiful. This is the same with other software that are unethical >>> but beautiful. Free software is about freedom, not popularity >>> >>> Librement, >>> >>> Le 1 août 2020 19:34:56 GMT+02:00, Denver Gingerich >>> >>> <>> a écrit : >>>> On Sat, Aug 01, 2020 at 07:25:15PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote: >>>>> The second point I was trying to raise is that XMPP doesn't >>>>> have good >>>>> clients for Mobile, >>>> >>>> You mention this repeatedly without explaining why Conversations >>>> has >>>> "bad design". Most people I know love the design of >>>> Conversations, >>>> so I have trouble seeing why Conversations is holding back XMPP in >>>> some way. >>>> >>>>> doesn't have modern features >>>> >>>> The only feature you have explicitly mentioned is "stickers". I'm >>>> not sure why this is an important feature for FSF to have in a >>>> protocol they want to promote. Are there other "modern features" >>>> that XMPP is missing? >>>> >>>>> or even a coherent standard. >>>> >>>> As we've mentioned, there are coherent standards for XMPP. If you >>>> want a client that supports the important standards, use Gajim or >>>> Conversations. >>>> >>>>> So by that point I was advocating to have a Matrix server so >>>>> we >>>>> can >>>>> attract new contributors that may want modern features. >>>> >>>> Per above, please tell us which "modern features" you mean. >>>> Thanks! >>>> >>>> Denver >>>> <> >>> Matrix is a badly designed protocol (especially the s2s part) >>> and >>> is >>> not more modern than XMPP. In computer science, be young is not >>> always >>> a quality for a protocol, and XMPP has proven many times it was >>> evolutive and reliable. >>> The XSF point of view is different from the Matrix/Vector one : >>> the XSF >>> is a non profit foundation, in the tracks of IETF. They made a >>> protocol >>> in the hope that it will be useful and that's it. You can't say >>> the >>> same for Vector. >>> We shouldn't have that discussion since the company behind the >>> Matrix >>> protocol advocates for non free software, and open source when >>> they >>> want to be popular. >>> > If Conversations are the benchmark for how much behind XMPP is >>> in > >>> capabilities that a modern user wants, then I don't know if it >>> can >>> be > >>> overcomed. >>> I can't understand what do you mean. Conversations is developed >>> by >>> a >>> very small team, practically one person, and you conclude that >>> this app >>> that evolves permanently has already shown all that could be >>> shown >>> ? >>> Excuse me, but at this time there is no client for Matrix as >>> functional >>> as Conversations (since non free software usage or advocacy is >>> for >>> me >>> an anti-feature worst than "lack of stickers") and XMPP server >>> softwares like Ejabberd or Prosody are way more reliable and >>> powerful >>> than Synapse (which is subject to overconsumption I observed). >>> It is clear that you like Matrix very well, but your arguments >>> are >>> wrong and subjective. >>> > In mobile at least there doesn't seem to be enough development >>> outside > of Conversations. >>> I can't agree. ChatSecure (for iOS) is a really active project >>> and >>> devs >>> of both Conversations and ChatSecure are always in touch, and >>> are >>> XSF >>> members. There are many forks of both, and it provides >>> additionnal >>> choices for people. >>> On mobile, there is only one functionnal Matrix client : >>> Element. >>> And >>> it advocates for non free software, especially Google one. >>> > I know it is pretty popular with privacy folks though. So >>> maybe >>> it >>> finds some use there. >>> Have you ever read RMS ? Or listen to him ? Everyone should care >>> about >>> privacy, everyone should encrypt his communications. XMPP's >>> modern >>> encryption (known as OMEMO) is way more secure than Olm/Megolm >>> (because >>> it seems Vector thought that forward secrecy was an anti-feature >>> lol). >>> Do you think the FSF should advocate for that? With all the >>> problems >>> that Vector has, it would be a treason for people who trust the >>> FSF. >>> I can understand you like Element because it has stickers and >>> it is >>> beautiful. This is the same with other software that are >>> unethical >>> but >>> beautiful. Free software is about freedom, not popularity >>> Librement, >>> >>> Le 1 août 2020 19:34:56 GMT+02:00, Denver Gingerich >>> >>> <>> >>> a écrit : >>> >>> On Sat, Aug 01, 2020 at 07:25:15PM +0200, Msavoritias wrote: >>> >>> The second point I was trying to raise is that XMPP doesn't >>> have >>> good >>> clients for Mobile, >>> >>> You mention this repeatedly without explaining why >>> Conversations >>> has >>> "bad design". Most people I know love the design of >>> Conversations, >>> so I have trouble seeing why Conversations is holding back >>> XMPP >>> in >>> some way. >>> >>> doesn't have modern features >>> >>> The only feature you have explicitly mentioned is "stickers". >>> I'm >>> not sure why this is an important feature for FSF to have in a >>> protocol they want to promote. Are there other "modern >>> features" >>> that XMPP is missing? >>> >>> or even a coherent standard. >>> >>> As we've mentioned, there are coherent standards for XMPP. If >>> you >>> want a client that supports the important standards, use >>> Gajim or >>> Conversations. >>> >>> So by that point I was advocating to have a Matrix server so >>> we >>> can >>> attract new contributors that may want modern features. >>> >>> Per above, please tell us which "modern features" you mean. >>> Thanks! >>> Denver >>> [1]<> >>> >>> References >>> >>> 1. <> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> libreplanet-discuss mailing list >>> libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org >>> >>> <> >>> >>> <> >> > _______________________________________________ > libreplanet-discuss mailing list > libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org > >