Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (rysiek@mstdn.social)'s status on Thursday, 16-Mar-2023 21:51:27 JST Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

   • Evan Prodromou

   @arcade this. And while XMPP was not entirely extinguished, it took a huge hit. Google got a lot of good press from it (from FOSS people, no less) and then when enough people moved to GTalk thinking "well it's still just XMPP!", they did a bait-and-switch and boom, no XMPP in GTalk suddenly.

   @evan

   • Embed this notice
     Evan Prodromou (evan@prodromou.pub)'s status on Thursday, 16-Mar-2023 21:51:26 JST Evan Prodromou

     in reply to

     @rysiek @arcade

     So, in this theory, the growth of GTalk was due to its support of XMPP?

   • Embed this notice
     Evan Prodromou (evan@prodromou.pub)'s status on Thursday, 16-Mar-2023 21:57:31 JST Evan Prodromou

     in reply to

     @rysiek @arcade

     Google dropping XMPP wasn't the cause of the problems with that network. It was a symptom of the problems with that network.

     You need to read what "embrace, extend and extinguish" means.

     It doesn't mean "support an open standard for a while then drop it."

     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace%2C_extend%2C_and_extinguish?wprov=sfla1

   • Embed this notice
     Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (rysiek@mstdn.social)'s status on Thursday, 16-Mar-2023 21:57:33 JST Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

     in reply to

     • Evan Prodromou

     @evan not only, nor even mainly due to XMPP, no.

     My hypothesis is that they never cared about XMPP in the first place, but it was easy to deploy and gave them a nice PR boost from the techies that started promoting them with glee.

     "No downside".

     And then when enough users joined GTalk — partially brought in by the techies, partially calmed down by techies not warning them against it — they shut down XMPP s2s and moved away from the protocol eventually.

     @arcade

   • Embed this notice
     Evan Prodromou (evan@prodromou.pub)'s status on Thursday, 16-Mar-2023 21:58:07 JST Evan Prodromou

     in reply to

     @rysiek @arcade rightfully humble!

   • Embed this notice
     Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (rysiek@mstdn.social)'s status on Thursday, 16-Mar-2023 21:58:08 JST Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

     in reply to

     • Evan Prodromou

     @evan there's a world of difference between "XMPP is what allowed GTalk to grow", which is absurd, and "Google used XMPP to help grow GTalk, and then dumped it", which is a pretty decent description of what happened IMVHO.

     Either way, XMPP was far worse-off after that, in ways I do not believe it would be if Google never touched it.

     And if we are not careful, same might happen with fedi and P92.

     @arcade

   • Embed this notice
     Evan Prodromou (evan@prodromou.pub)'s status on Thursday, 16-Mar-2023 22:04:21 JST Evan Prodromou

     in reply to

     @rysiek I think you vastly overestimate the importance of XMPP to the success, such as it was, of GTalk.

     Regardless, we agree that it was not an intentional strategy to join the network, create incompatible non-standard extensions, and use that advantage to take over the network.

   • Embed this notice
     Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (rysiek@mstdn.social)'s status on Thursday, 16-Mar-2023 22:04:22 JST Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

     in reply to

     • Evan Prodromou

     @evan I am well aware of what that means, thank you.

     I agree that XMPP had (and continues to have) a bunch of problems, in no small aprt related to the XEP compatibility matrix insanity — which to be fair they are now finally trying to reign in.

     And I am not saying GTalk leaving "cased problems with the network", which sounds like implying *technical* problems. I am saying XMPP was basically mined for user base and techies' goodwill.

     @arcade

   • Embed this notice
     pettter (pettter@mastodon.acc.umu.se)'s status on Thursday, 16-Mar-2023 22:16:58 JST pettter

     in reply to

     • Evan Prodromou

     @rysiek I've made the point at least once since Meta announced their intentions that it's a) going to be bad for AP and the wider fediverse b) pre-emptive defederation is probably a good idea but not going to help against a), c) the basic problem is Meta being so huge, and d) the _basic_ basic problem is capitalism

     If we want a sustainable internet infrastructure, we can't have these megacorporations. Break 'em up.
     @evan

   • Embed this notice
     Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (rysiek@mstdn.social)'s status on Thursday, 16-Mar-2023 22:16:59 JST Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

     in reply to

     • Evan Prodromou

     @evan I am not saying this is necessarily a completely bad thing, though, either!

     I want Facebook to be forced to open up their protocol. I want all social media platforms to be compatible on some basic protocol level.

     But this has to be done very, very carefully. Especially when the power differential is as cartoonishly humongous as between Meta nad fedi.

     So when I see a super-optimistic take, I recoil a bit. Because I remember those from the time when Google was joining XMPP. ?

   • Embed this notice
     Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (rysiek@mstdn.social)'s status on Thursday, 16-Mar-2023 22:17:00 JST Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

     in reply to

     • Evan Prodromou

     @evan and in fact, not assuming conspiracy or malice makes it even worse!

     Let's assume Google (and Facebook) had joined XMPP without malice. And XMPP came out much worse off for it.

     Let's assume Google had joined the RSS bandwagon with Reader without malice. And the RSS ecosystem got hobbled when they shuttered it.

     Let's assume Meta is joining fedi without malice… ?

   • Embed this notice
     Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (rysiek@mstdn.social)'s status on Thursday, 16-Mar-2023 22:17:01 JST Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

     in reply to

     • Evan Prodromou

     @evan yes, we largely agree on that.

     But as I mentioned in a different branch of this thread, harm des not need to be intentional or pre-planned to be harm nonetheless.

     I do not need to assume intentional pre-planned malice on Meta's part to be very seriously concerned about P92.

     Fedi is tiny compared to Meta. Power differential is immense. Incentives are completely different. There's a lot to be concerned about.

     And saying "fediverse is taking over big companies" just brushes that aside.

   • Embed this notice
     Evan Prodromou (evan@prodromou.pub)'s status on Thursday, 16-Mar-2023 22:20:30 JST Evan Prodromou

     in reply to

     • Jeff Moe

     @jebba @rysiek @arcade

     "One of the reasons google's chat had any momentum was because it worked with jabber."

     Prove it.

   • Embed this notice
     Jeff Moe (jebba@jebba.moe)'s status on Thursday, 16-Mar-2023 22:20:31 JST Jeff Moe

     in reply to

     • Evan Prodromou

     @evan @rysiek @arcade

     One of the reasons google's chat had any momentum was because it worked with jabber. That's why it was used. Otherwise they would have no one on the network.

     Since geeks saw it was "open" and compatible with what they were using *THEY WERE THE FIRST ADOPT THE NETWORK*.