Modern XMPP project discussion - 2020-03-05


  1. jonas’

    s/joinxmpp/joinsnikket/? :-O

  2. pep.

    might be at some point, who knows :)

  3. pep.

    I don't know if that's a goal for snikket though

  4. Ge0rG

    Maybe rather joinmysnikket?

  5. MattJ

    I personally don't believe in public servers as a sustainable model for the network (bootstrapping it, maybe)

  6. MattJ

    But can't rule out a joinsnikket or something

  7. emus

    MattJ: I believe in you have the choice (and that must be a valid thing to have a choice)

  8. emus

    Few people can maintain it theirselves or have an interest to do so

  9. Daniel

    The opposite of public isn't necessarily self hosted

  10. MattJ

    The point of Snikket isn't that everyone runs it themselves, it's that someone you know/trust runs it

  11. MattJ

    Few public servers are transparent about who runs them, why, how well maintained they are (backups? security?) and when they will shut down and make your account useless

  12. emus

    > The opposite of public isn't necessarily self hosted Thats right, still, if you let host for yourself, you have the same problem. Even more, from a public hoster and how they apprear to the outside you can read a lot how much they care. Of course, you can fake it, but how someone writes their believes about data and ToS is a statement I think. And finally, in a close thing you still can be "bootstrapped"

  13. emus

    Most crimes happens within the family, right?

  14. emus

    > Thats right, still, if you let host for yourself on a closed server, you have the same problem. Even more, from a public hoster and how they apprear to the outside you can read a lot how much they care. Of course, you can fake it, but how someone writes their believes about data and ToS is a statement I think. And finally, in a close thing you still can be "bootstrapped" > Most crimes happens within the family, right?

  15. emus

    ups

  16. emus

    ups.

  17. emus

    I wanted to correct the text, not qutote^^

  18. jonas’

    ah yeah, I’ve read that as a concern quite often already

  19. Link Mauve

    MattJ, all things you mention are part of the goals of CHATONS, btw.

  20. Link Mauve

    It’s not specific to XMPP, but many of them are running XMPP services, and we’re trying to encourage the other ones to do that too.

  21. Ge0rG

    Link Mauve: what's that?

  22. Link Mauve

    Ge0rG, an initiative from Framasoft to help decentralise and federate hosters of various services around a common set of rules.

  23. Link Mauve

    https://chatons.org/en

  24. Ge0rG

    That's great! Also sounds like *IM* might be interested in a German faction.

  25. Ge0rG

    So Modern xmpp is a technical thing, CHATONS a political one, and snikket is somewhere in the middle?

  26. Link Mauve

    Rules and values, obviously.

  27. Link Mauve

    In a traditional anarchist way. :)

  28. MattJ

    Maybe someone should map all these out somewhere :)

  29. MattJ

    Snikket is loosely "applied Modern XMPP"

  30. Ge0rG

    Maybe we need to consolidate instead of mapping out?

  31. Zash

    That's not how humans behave

  32. MattJ

    Well it doesn't make sense to consolidate a cross-project documentation project with a specific implementation

  33. Zash

    To me, "consolidate" just sounds like "give up"

  34. Ge0rG

    Zash: is "unify" better?

  35. Zash

    No, I'm too grumpy.

  36. MattJ

    Another reason not to run a public server in 2020+: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/03/graham-blumenthal-bill-new-path-doj-finally-break-encryption

  37. emus

    MattJ: Sounds like making even more public outside from US

  38. MattJ

    Other countries will follow

  39. MattJ

    Guaranteed

  40. emus

    MattJ: I can imagine, but that issue is not about public servers only I think

  41. MattJ

    It means the server operator would be legally responsible for all content going through their server

  42. MattJ

    Which makes it very unlikely you would ever want to run a server with open registration

  43. Daniel

    It just means that the list of countries I can't travel to gets longer

  44. emus

    ^^ How long is it already?

  45. emus

    > Which makes it very unlikely you would ever want to run a server with open registration Dont we have that particular situation already? And still people run TOR relays?

  46. Zash

    Varies with juristiction

  47. emus

    Zash: But basically they make you alreafy responsible or? EU should go for a new way "digital freedom" turn back their legislations and sueveillance from the recent years (except privacy). Maybe US people start going "back" 😊 And put the money to educational purposes. Win win

  48. emus

    Zash: But basically they make you already responsible or? EU should go for a new way "digital freedom" turn back their legislations and sueveillance from the recent years (except privacy). Maybe US people start going "back" 😊 And put the money to educational purposes. Win win

  49. Zash

    Going in that direction yes, last I heard

  50. Zash

    How does law enforcement and media companies profit from that?

  51. Ge0rG

    And this is why Germany is working on a new law that will require online services to report user passwords to the police

  52. Zash

    dafuq

  53. Zash

    We got some law about letting law enforcement secretly get into your encrypted devices coming into effect april 1st. Secret data reading something sometthing.

  54. Zash

    Much fun.

  55. Ge0rG

    In Germany we got that some years ago and the activists tagged it the "federal Trojan"

  56. Ge0rG

    And possession of hacker tools is also forbidden

  57. Zash

    HACKER TOOLS

  58. Zash

    sunglases and hoodies?

  59. Ge0rG

    And stickers that can be put on laptops

  60. emus

    > And stickers that can be put on laptops Cruel basterds!

  61. emus

    If they would put their money into IT competence, they wouldn`t fear hackers living on their bankrupt software structure

  62. emus

    Anyway, offtopic 👋