I see people in the comments discussing applications for instant messaging. What is worth talking about is protocols.
Once upon a time there were IRC and XMPP.
But for whatever reason people stick to silly corporate funded gimmicks.
Support open protocols.
I am really happy that for email we still have SMTP and IMAP. And if my current email provider decides to screw me up I will just jump over to another one in a matter of hours.
There is no added value in signal, imessage, whatsapp, threema, icq, viber, telegram, slack.
All these “apps” want to substitute open protocols the same way google and facebook try to replace world wide web.
If we talk about Signal. I am still not convinced. Yes, they are a 501c3 nonprofit.
But what they lack is transparency of decision making process. And their governance model is not clear. In other words there is no guarantee that they won’t irreversibly switch from good to evil.
Now, on protocols. Imagine signal was a protocol similar to smtp or xmpp in the sense that you would not be tied to a specific app or server or company or people. Matrix looks promising in this regard but unfortunately matrix is too complicated and at this level its adoption rate will be even lower than signal’s
So why don’t we put some love into creating a protocol for a secure e2e instant messaging and video conferencing that we would stick to for the next 30-40 years?
That would be a real innovation and value for everyone excluding corps and rotten political regimes.
The vast majority of the population does not know what a communication protocol is. They know whatsapp is a messaging app, their friends are on it, and they can use it to reach them.
If you speak in a language they understand, such as "there are approaches that enable different apps to talk to each other, so you only need 1 instead of a handful", they might get interested.
Another protocol will not help if you don't have an app and a network of users that can compete with whatsapp. As far as I know, whatsapp implements just that for IMs exactly (whisper protocol made by signal) and its still a walled garden.
Yep, I agree. It is like a consequence of hick’s law. The more options you have two choose from the higher probability you will choose the one already chosen by the majority in your circle.
In this regard, I recall an old advice: if you’re a linux newbie and aren’t sure what linux distribution to choose, choose the one used by your friend/neighbour.
Once upon a time there were IRC and XMPP.
But for whatever reason people stick to silly corporate funded gimmicks.
Support open protocols.
I am really happy that for email we still have SMTP and IMAP. And if my current email provider decides to screw me up I will just jump over to another one in a matter of hours.
There is no added value in signal, imessage, whatsapp, threema, icq, viber, telegram, slack.
All these “apps” want to substitute open protocols the same way google and facebook try to replace world wide web.
If we talk about Signal. I am still not convinced. Yes, they are a 501c3 nonprofit. But what they lack is transparency of decision making process. And their governance model is not clear. In other words there is no guarantee that they won’t irreversibly switch from good to evil.
Now, on protocols. Imagine signal was a protocol similar to smtp or xmpp in the sense that you would not be tied to a specific app or server or company or people. Matrix looks promising in this regard but unfortunately matrix is too complicated and at this level its adoption rate will be even lower than signal’s
So why don’t we put some love into creating a protocol for a secure e2e instant messaging and video conferencing that we would stick to for the next 30-40 years?
That would be a real innovation and value for everyone excluding corps and rotten political regimes.