6 ms·

I was generally "Matrix feels right" but I read through [0] and other discussions and I think that Matrix's E2E focus + way of duplicating everything just means

by rtpg 23d ago

I was generally "Matrix feels right" but I read through [0] and other discussions and I think that Matrix's E2E focus + way of duplicating everything just means that it suffers a lot of scalability issues that "plain old Jabber" won't have. now Jabber has client issues, but stuff like Monal "basically work" for text + images + chat rooms. I'm excited for Fluux. You can of course set up one of the random web clients. Stuff like reactions "work", notifications is a solved problem. But like... at a basic level, "I'm hosting a Jabber server for my small community" has a lot less headaches than with Matrix. Yes if your server goes down then you lose the chat. Oh no. Plenty survived off of IRC IMO. For the HN crowd... I would say that there's still fun jank, but who doesn't like jankiness in their programs for fun? People should swarm to this opportunity to have some fun with busted tooling again! [0] https://wiki.alopex.li/ADiveIntoOpenChat https://wiki.alopex.li/ADiveIntoOpenChat

lxgr 23d ago
> notifications is a solved problem. Eh, last time I tried I still got leftover notifications for messages I had long read and even replied to on a different client hanging around on my other devices. (To be fair, Matrix does the same thing too, but only in roughly 50% of all cases, which is much more infuriating than something I can at least understand as a fundamental protocol limitation and not a weird implementation bug.) I've been using XMPP on and off over the past 20 years and I would really love it to succeed, but papercuts like these need to be solved before I can recommend it even to technically open-minded friends. > But like... at a basic level, "I'm hosting a Jabber server for my small community" has a lot less headaches than with Matrix. Yes if your server goes down then you lose the chat. Oh no. Plenty survived off of IRC IMO. It might be great for that, but by the same token it's quite terrible as a persistent personal messaging handle. Durable identity/handles shouldn't be so bound to a community, since it makes it very hard to switch and you need to put an incredible amount of trust in the admin(s) as a result. (This is a tangent to the Matrix vs. XMPP point, as both have the same issue, as far as I can tell.) Ideally, I'd like to have me@mydomain.com as my persistent XMPP ID that I can freely migrate across servers just by updating a DNS record without having to worry too much about who is actually hosting the server. The AT protocol does this right.
- rtpg 23d ago
  > Ideally, I'd like to have me@mydomain.com as my persistent XMPP ID that I can freely migrate across servers just by updating a DNS record without having to worry too much about who is actually hosting the server. The AT protocol does this right. I suppose here you're saying "I should be able to do this without providers having to do work"? Like you show up with lxgr@foo.com to bar.com and create an account, and everything kinda fits into place (modulo you having to set up some DNS?) It is already possible of course to have XMPP server at domain A handle things for domain B as well. But it is cool how ATProto seems to really bake in the concept of "all domains are welcome".
  - lxgr 23d ago
    Not quite. I'd like to have lxgr@example.com hosted at xmpp.foo.com today, but if foo.com shuts down unexpectedly one day, I'd like to be able to redirect it to xmpp.bar.com. I might lose my chat history and maybe my contact list if I don't have a local backup of it, but people would still be able to reach me as lxgr@example.com. Ideally, I'd be able to upload my local, end-to-end encrypted backup to xmpp.bar.com and continue exactly where I left off. AT proto's main innovation to me is decoupling the concerns of user identifier and data host at the protocol level, in the same way that DNS and my web or mail host are decoupled.
    - goffi 22d ago
      Hey. I'm currently working on this: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0516.html https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0516.html
      - lxgr 22d ago
        This is awesome, thank you!
    - rtpg 22d ago
      I mean apart from the uploading of the backup xmpp already lets you do this right? That's my impression at least. Maybe I'm misunderstanding something. (The premise in my understanding is that you own example.com and control its DNS records right? And not "well I hosted on foo.com as name@foo.com but it went down and now I want to move")
regularfry 23d ago
I found snikket to be pretty much perfect for the use case I wanted, which was something locally-hosted I could drop in a VM so I had a channel for talking to bots that didn't need API keys for third party services. The only downsides I've experienced are: 1. Images and accompanying text get separated, which turn-based bots get confused by. I seem to recall there's a standard for this but it's not implemented. 2. XMPP support isn't common in claw-type agents so I've had to patch it in. Not a terrible experience overall. I had a look at Matrix but bounced off Element, hard.
- lxgr 23d ago
  > XMPP support isn't common in claw-type agents so I've had to patch it in. I found this pretty baffling/sad. Why do these agent harnesses have messaging plug-ins for the most obscure messaging platforms but not XMPP? It seems like a no-brainer! People would apparently rather pay for a second number/SIM/phone dedicated to Openclaw on WhatsApp and suffer periodic outages due to Meta actively discouraging automation use than set up a minimal XMPP server and client... Even setting up Matrix (at least with E2E encryption) was incredibly painful. It worked in the end for me, but the amount of tokens I've had to burn... And I don't even want to think about the next update.
  - singpolyma3 23d ago
    Submit patch?
    - regularfry 22d ago
      I did this on one project but things moved fast enough (and I've had too much going on) that I couldn't go round the review cycle fast enough and keep it architecturally aligned to get it merged.
account42 22d ago
> Yes if your server goes down then you lose the chat. Don't all actively maintained servers support persistent message archive management now?

by rtpg 23d ago

lxgr 23d ago

> notifications is a solved problem. Eh, last time I tried I still got leftover notifications for messages I had long read and even replied to on a different client hanging around on my other devices. (To be fair, Matrix does the same thing too, but only in roughly 50% of all cases, which is much more infuriating than something I can at least understand as a fundamental protocol limitation and not a weird implementation bug.) I've been using XMPP on and off over the past 20 years and I would really love it to succeed, but papercuts like these need to be solved before I can recommend it even to technically open-minded friends. > But like... at a basic level, "I'm hosting a Jabber server for my small community" has a lot less headaches than with Matrix. Yes if your server goes down then you lose the chat. Oh no. Plenty survived off of IRC IMO. It might be great for that, but by the same token it's quite terrible as a persistent personal messaging handle. Durable identity/handles shouldn't be so bound to a community, since it makes it very hard to switch and you need to put an incredible amount of trust in the admin(s) as a result. (This is a tangent to the Matrix vs. XMPP point, as both have the same issue, as far as I can tell.) Ideally, I'd like to have me@mydomain.com as my persistent XMPP ID that I can freely migrate across servers just by updating a DNS record without having to worry too much about who is actually hosting the server. The AT protocol does this right.

rtpg 23d ago
> Ideally, I'd like to have me@mydomain.com as my persistent XMPP ID that I can freely migrate across servers just by updating a DNS record without having to worry too much about who is actually hosting the server. The AT protocol does this right. I suppose here you're saying "I should be able to do this without providers having to do work"? Like you show up with lxgr@foo.com to bar.com and create an account, and everything kinda fits into place (modulo you having to set up some DNS?) It is already possible of course to have XMPP server at domain A handle things for domain B as well. But it is cool how ATProto seems to really bake in the concept of "all domains are welcome".
- lxgr 23d ago
  Not quite. I'd like to have lxgr@example.com hosted at xmpp.foo.com today, but if foo.com shuts down unexpectedly one day, I'd like to be able to redirect it to xmpp.bar.com. I might lose my chat history and maybe my contact list if I don't have a local backup of it, but people would still be able to reach me as lxgr@example.com. Ideally, I'd be able to upload my local, end-to-end encrypted backup to xmpp.bar.com and continue exactly where I left off. AT proto's main innovation to me is decoupling the concerns of user identifier and data host at the protocol level, in the same way that DNS and my web or mail host are decoupled.
  - goffi 22d ago
    Hey. I'm currently working on this: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0516.html https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0516.html
    - lxgr 22d ago
      This is awesome, thank you!
  - rtpg 22d ago
    I mean apart from the uploading of the backup xmpp already lets you do this right? That's my impression at least. Maybe I'm misunderstanding something. (The premise in my understanding is that you own example.com and control its DNS records right? And not "well I hosted on foo.com as name@foo.com but it went down and now I want to move")

regularfry 23d ago

I found snikket to be pretty much perfect for the use case I wanted, which was something locally-hosted I could drop in a VM so I had a channel for talking to bots that didn't need API keys for third party services. The only downsides I've experienced are: 1. Images and accompanying text get separated, which turn-based bots get confused by. I seem to recall there's a standard for this but it's not implemented. 2. XMPP support isn't common in claw-type agents so I've had to patch it in. Not a terrible experience overall. I had a look at Matrix but bounced off Element, hard.

lxgr 23d ago
> XMPP support isn't common in claw-type agents so I've had to patch it in. I found this pretty baffling/sad. Why do these agent harnesses have messaging plug-ins for the most obscure messaging platforms but not XMPP? It seems like a no-brainer! People would apparently rather pay for a second number/SIM/phone dedicated to Openclaw on WhatsApp and suffer periodic outages due to Meta actively discouraging automation use than set up a minimal XMPP server and client... Even setting up Matrix (at least with E2E encryption) was incredibly painful. It worked in the end for me, but the amount of tokens I've had to burn... And I don't even want to think about the next update.
- singpolyma3 23d ago
  Submit patch?
  - regularfry 22d ago
    I did this on one project but things moved fast enough (and I've had too much going on) that I couldn't go round the review cycle fast enough and keep it architecturally aligned to get it merged.

account42 22d ago

> Yes if your server goes down then you lose the chat. Don't all actively maintained servers support persistent message archive management now?