There’s DeltaChat!
Also Fluxer, a FOSS Discord clone, is getting beta federation this year.
Fluxer is using a pre-existing protocol though
Ah yeah, I mixed protocols with platforms using them. DeltaChat does have its own protocol though - Chatmail.
Adding yet another standard to the list of competing standards is not the right move.
Just giving up and doing nothing is also not the right move (if you are in a position to actually do something and you have reason to care).
The right move:
Look at the details of all the competing standards. Evaluate their technical merit. Evaluate their organizational setup and potential to improve. Pick one. Push for its universal adoption and/or improvement.
What’s wrong with XMPP?
It evolves too slow.
I mean, in so much less time, Matrix has just got better.
Meanwhile, essential XEPs for modern usability (as the 0503) are undervalued because they’re all old and rigid people who refuse do to (justified) changes.
essential XEPs for modern usability (as the 0503) are undervalued
Interesting.
in so much less time, Matrix has just got better.
AFAIK Matrix still has the same decryption issues. I won’t go into all of its other criticism (unless the thread goes that way).
But I have observed that Movim for instance has matured a lot over the past year. It now has communities and has added many other user experience features.
Yeah, but Movim (and Gajim) are the exception that confirms the rule. Movim do implement that XEP, at least, but Gajim has only been discussing it for a while without any real conclusion.
In short, this comment
Edit: But yeah, the Olm/Megolm issue hasn’t been properly addressed, but as for the other features they look like they’re speedrunning while doing them just right.
Nobody to talk to
Seriously. Is this a protocol issue?
Based
Calling IRC a shitty standard sure is a take.
IRC is dogshit
Shit looks like it hasn’t had a UI update since 1997.
It’s a protocol you numpty. If you don’t like the UI, built a better one.
I hate the original “14 standards” xkcd comic with a passion. People should try shit and see if it works, if multiple standards works then compatibility layers/bridges will also be built.
I’m happy that multiple DE exist, I love having multiple choice for my init system (and I say this while liking a lot of what systemD offer), bootloader, text editor, etc…
See you have to be careful because with that approach you can get a USB c situation
One thing is that, another thing is centralisation around a rigid and, sometimes, even badly aged standard just because of “you shouldn’t create any more standards!”.
New standards should absolutely be created because that means that there are more options for different profiles, and also that there will be more chances for the issues on existing standards to be addressed.
Consider me ignorant but whats the USB-C situation ?
Well … Sigh in short because it is meaningless.
As a condensed half true and a bit hyperbole summary: Usb-c is first and foremost just a connector definition. So getting a usb-c cable is basically saying you will have a cable with this plug and a specific wire configuration. But you can omit wires if you don’t need them and still have a USB c cable. So from the phyisical definition this means your cable can have a plug that connects into a socket and is not wired internally at all. You can still call this a USB cable. That is why apple usb-c cables are often unable to transfer data, for example. This is done for downward compatibility with the USB standard.
The USB standard defines the functional properties of a USB cable. Depending on which version, which can be any number between 1.0 and 3.2 or thunderbolt, you have different lower and upper bounds that are possible. Except with USB 1.0 to 3.0 you don’t have lower bounds, you can omit parts of the specification completely and you can still call it a USB 2 or whatever cable. This means just because you have a USB c cable it does not give you any information about it’s capabilities. Except if it is thunderbolt or USB 3.2 because these have minimum requirements.
Because the functional and constructional definition is so wide ranged the standard does not give you any meaningful information. Which means it’s basically useless.
I am guessing that they are referring to the situation, that while all usb-c can be connected to each other you can have very different ones. Fast data transfer and slow. 10 watt and 100 watt and so on
My Pixel 10 Pro XL is allegedly capable of fast charging at up to 45W. Great, I have a 65W charger, let’s give it a go - it tops out at 22.5W no matter what. Alright, I’ll try my 30W charger - only 15W now. How about the 20W one, will that work? Nope, still only 15W.
I do some searching and found out that the Pixel needs a charger that supports PPS rather than just PD to achieve higher charging speeds. So I find a 45W charger that supports PPS. Finally, let’s give it a go! … 24-25W maximum. Turns out that yes, it does support PPS, but not up to 21V which the Pixel needs to charge at 37-38W (and it won’t go up to 45W despite Google’s claim that it’s capable of that).
All that said, that has nothing to do with the connector cable. It’s just that USB charging standards are a mess.
Fair enough, but isnt most of that circumvented by getting good cables ?
Tbh USB-C was a godsend I bought in early but I prefer having to grapple wether my cables are up to par than if I have a fitting one at all :D
I find the current situation much better than having 33 usb standards and a cable for each and 99 adapters…
So yes it is better. Every usbc cable will work (also I think there are less “power only” cables now)
Yes, the current situation with a baseline is definitely better than what it was before.
ONE PLUG FOR EVERYTHING.
just hope the plug has the right pinout, and the cable the right capacity.
that explains my fucking headlight what is refusing to charge about 25%. slapped a better cable on there and it’s getting up to 50% now.
i just want it to last 60 miles dammit.
That’s not on USB C mate. Shitty products will always exist. Like some can only be powered/charged from USB A to C, not C to C, since they didn’t add a resistor to the CC line. A microscopic sub 1 cent part.
it’s on that usb c. piece of shit wire can’t even boof it
Meanwhile everyone is using Discord (still after Chinese funding, enshittification, age verification)
A fringe moved to non federated options Fluxer Haven Stoat
Matrix is too expensive to host, xmpp has no clients to use IRC can’t even edit a message.
Editing messages is for cowards. Just dno’t make mistake.
Hahaha
There are plenty of XMPP clients out there that work great… finding one that supports all the features you actually care about…now that’s the hard part. XMPP has too many opt in extensions and it’s very hit and miss with clients
The problem is that the only one XEP that could allow for a Discord-like UX (XEP-0503: Server-Side Spaces) that, let’s admit, is the best one for many (I, in example, prefer that UX over the IRC or plain contacts + MUCs list UX [like, the WhatsApp, Signal, Telegram or most XMPP clients), is only actually used in one client (Movim), and only other one has discussed implementing it (Gajim, that has something like a Client-Side Spaces impl that is really prone to break up), has only done that, discuss it.
And why it’s a Discord-like UX better, in my opinion?
Because it allows for more structured, focused and topic-based conversation and discussion. That’s why that UX has gotten so popular among not only gamers, but also among students, freelancers, creative groups, or even scientists and companies. It’s less prone to become a mess than a plain list where everything is mixed up.
A bare minimum includes: Editing, notifications, 1-1 calls, group calls voip, emoji reactions, discord servers aka matrix space aka fluxer community, mobile app.
Sorry but nothing in the xmpp space gets close. I’m looking for a viable Discord alternative not a gTalk competitor from 10 years ago.
Yes, you basically restated my point, I’m not really disagreeing, but saying there aren’t any clients isn’t really the case either.
IRC can’t even edit a message.
you say that like if it were a bad thing
*You say that as if it were a bad thing.
Why is matrix expensive?
people think anything more than 2cores and 2gb of ram is to much. Plus there is a lightweight 400mb matrix but its ignored.
If someone uploads a photo or video, the server hosts it and sends to everyone.
Expensive
Of give each user like 50mb of space then make them use a link for God’s sake
Just don’t federate, it isn’t expensive then!
Isn’t that how it’s supposed to work? What’s the alternate model?
I think they meant each server hosts the same files, not just the home server.
Here’s how Fluxer plans on doing it: https://fluxer.app/blog/roadmap-2026#why-polyproto-and-not-matrix
Can you choose to host it without video and limited image size?
You can limit upload size.
That reminds me, I should try to set up a Bolt bridge for my Discord-Stoat server pair again.
Chinese funding, nothing wrong with that. A CEO funding genocide however.
Fediverse is better at everything except onboarding. The access methods are complicated and ill explained for users who expect and app and simple signup. Regular users have no idea what an instance is. Even people who are TRYING to join the fediverse willingly pile in lemmy.world because it’s the default on most apps. There needs to be a round robin assigner to instances that opt in in order to spread users around who don’t care which general instance they join.
The fediverse feels like old internet which I like but is also a barrier to people just looking for easy alternatives.
I love this round robin instance assigner idea.
Onboarding is the same as for email, which most people seem to pass just fine. Fedi instance is analogous to an email provider. I would even vouch to move from the ‘<some fedi type> instance’ hosting-based terminology to the ‘<some fedi type> provider’ user-centric terminology.
IMO it’s the content discovery across instances and the subtler implications of your chosen provider that are harder to grasp.
its great that you can explain that, its not at all obvious to people new to the space. email is way more common, too, so IMHO not really comparable.
The average person has Gmail or Apple Mail because that’s what their phone had them set up, or (unfortunately) just uses their work email for everything. They’re not out there weighing alternatives.
Normies tend to stick with the first email they are signed up for. For a lot of younger Gen Z email is a non factor.
More standards! A million standards! A kaleidescope of possibilities, for every preference
Someone is an optimist…
Why photoshop an XKCD comic?
I assume they mean the new standard, good or bad as it might be, simply isn’t adopted, so we are still stuck with the 14 bad ones
Edit: I misread it, but this would also make for a good variation of the original :P
I read it more like the new, better standard is never developed because someone used the real xkcd as an argument against making the new standard
Oh wow yeah not sure how i didn’t notice that she responds with the original comic, you’re absolutely right
I have another way to see it: There is a good new standard but the bad old ones stick around. Like Torx, there is still a ton of Philips etc.
I know. Hence the change, there can be good standards but they do not magically make the others disappear.
Pretty sure it’s trying to say these people would have maybe made a better standard, but didn’t try because they read the original comic and didn’t want to make a 15th shitty standard.
“Why Photoshop an XKCD comic?” because they were making a point directly related to the XKCD comic?
Why use two different 4 fonts though
I genuinely thought it was a reference to the other four thing currently happening…
