Your argument smells of the "I can't code or don't know Linux, so there is no benefit for me in adopting free software" BS excuse given by those that are to comfortable with Windows/Mac and do not want to give up that away.
I am not a "Matrix guy", don't work for Element or the foundation. Yet, I can provide Matrix hosting services for you.
If you and more of my customers start asking for changes/improvements (customizations to the clients, better solutions for storage, different kinds of integrations, etc) I can go and develop the changes myself AND DEPLOY THEM on a server for you to use, without needing to ask permission from any of the Matrix devs or Element or the Foundation.
Just a very, very real example: I started looking into how I could integrate Hub20 with a Matrix homeserver to allow people to send/receive payments by messaging. It's the kind of functionality that would be super interesting for some folks, it does not require change in functionality of the core protocol in any way and it is very aligned with the Hub20's principle of facilitating access to crypto for the masses that do not want to deal with the complexities of blockchain/wallet/etc.
Such an integration will never happen on Signal. Signal being centralized, there is no separate instance that could try out this integration, or make it work only for the accounts that it can manage. Telegram is the same, WhatsApp is the same.
Instead of looking simply what is given to you "for free" in the different offerings from the market, start looking at what we can build on them. Don't let your lack of imagination become everyone else's weight to carry.
Starting with an ad hominem, are we, now? Most people can't program and are comfortable with Mac/Windows.
> Don't let your lack of imagination become everyone else's weight to carry.
No one here is shackling you to Signal. You're free to use and customize Matrix, but your argument that people using Signal is no progress at all based solely on being a centralized service is zealotry that is blinding you to the experiences of laypeople.
Starting with your root comment - most people use centralized services that have gone down at some point. In many cases they are still using those services, not because they're foolish muggles who can't program, but because it's worth more to use than it is to switch to something else. Centralized or not, people don't really care. This entire thread has been an effort to convince you that most people don't have the same values you do, hence the argumentum ad populum that you so despise being actually a valid metric of success for a project. Popularity is a flawed argument if you're in a formal debate, but it is useful to nearly every other venture.
So is Signal the best possible messenger it could be? No, probably not. I, too, would like to see a decentralized, federated protocol take off. But is it measurably better than plaintext SMS or Facebook Messenger? Yes, probably.
> Most people can't program and are comfortable with Mac/Windows.
Yeah, being comfortable is not the point. The point is being free.
> No one here is shackling you to Signal.
No one forced me to use WhatsApp. I still use it and still have on my phone. I did manage to introduce some people to Matrix, setup their accounts and install their clients when they wanted to talk to me, but there is a whole lot more that I am just not close enough and that I know won't bother to switch just because I am asking them to.
If people ask me, I'd do the best case I can to get them to Matrix (or XMPP. I don't care as long as it is open and free) and I will help them whenever possible to switch away from centralized systems.
> I, too, would like to see a decentralized, federated protocol take off.
If you truly want to see a federated alternative grow, you have to help it. It's not going to happen if we just stand passively waiting for some big benefactor to show up and decide they don't want to control this space. Every big company will try to control this space and they will always have more resources and will use the advantages that centralized services (faster development, economies of scale) gives them.
Network effects matter. There is no better time to help people switch to a more free option than now with this massive WhatsApp diaspora. If people settle for Signal, it would be better than WhatsApp but it would still be a massive wasted opportunity. This is why I am arguing now so strongly.
(Lastly, do you know one software that I am somewhat forced to use? Slack. Do you know what can replace Slack with just a wee bit of training? Matrix. Two birds, one stone)
> Signal is no progress at all.
In the terms of freedom: no, it is not. The server is supposedly open source, yet the last commit in their repository is from April. If someone decided to fork Signal to run their own server, would they get a current version? Would existing clients be able to use the different server?
The answer is possibly, maybe it will require a lot of work on the people doing the fork. Which is fine from the legal perspective, but really far from the mark from Open Source ethics.
You simply can not compare the amount of work that will be required (collectively and individually) in either outcome. Improvements to Matrix are being made, and both Element and the Matrix foundation are supportive of further developments and getting more people onboard. Signal is actively working to get forks to do extra leg-work.
Please take a look at https://drewdevault.com/2018/08/08/Signal.html and tell me if you continue to believe that forking/replicating Signal to make it decentralized would be the same amount of work as improving the UX of a Matrix client.
I read it, but I suspect that am fundamentally uninterested in (or not as interested in) the values that you share with the blog author. And you haven't ceded an inch on "centralized services are useless" so I have no motivation to continue this conversation.
Sorry, I have been in many different threads with different people and I don't think ever said "centralized services are useless", have I?
What you will usually read from me is that centralized services restrict our freedom, concentrate too much power in one single entity and are not worth the convenience.
That’s the equivalent of saying, “new thread, who dis?” I know what you said, the problem is that you’re not interested in hearing what others say. Especially regarding your bias of deeming centralized services “not worth the convenience” despite popular consensus voting otherwise via installations and usage. By all means hold to your view - you just have to do a better job of convincing others of it.
I am not a "Matrix guy", don't work for Element or the foundation. Yet, I can provide Matrix hosting services for you.
If you and more of my customers start asking for changes/improvements (customizations to the clients, better solutions for storage, different kinds of integrations, etc) I can go and develop the changes myself AND DEPLOY THEM on a server for you to use, without needing to ask permission from any of the Matrix devs or Element or the Foundation.
Just a very, very real example: I started looking into how I could integrate Hub20 with a Matrix homeserver to allow people to send/receive payments by messaging. It's the kind of functionality that would be super interesting for some folks, it does not require change in functionality of the core protocol in any way and it is very aligned with the Hub20's principle of facilitating access to crypto for the masses that do not want to deal with the complexities of blockchain/wallet/etc.
Such an integration will never happen on Signal. Signal being centralized, there is no separate instance that could try out this integration, or make it work only for the accounts that it can manage. Telegram is the same, WhatsApp is the same.
Instead of looking simply what is given to you "for free" in the different offerings from the market, start looking at what we can build on them. Don't let your lack of imagination become everyone else's weight to carry.
[0]: https:/docs.hub20.io