Technology

37702 readers

279 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

265

To comply with DMA, WhatsApp and Messenger will become interoperable via Signal protocol (techcrunch.com)

submitted 8 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

109 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 15 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

Meta says that it will only allow third-party developers to use another protocol besides Signal, “if they are able to demonstrate it offers the same security guarantees as Signal.”

If matrix finally finishes implementing MLS, maybe they could convince meta to use it.

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

What is the advantage of this over olm/megolm?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

Why MLS?

In most cases, MLS has better performance in large groups than Olm/Megolm.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Last time they touched an open chat protocol, they hung it out to dry. That was XMPP. That's why more than half of the fediverse is reluctant or outright hostile to federate with anything meta.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

maybe they could convince meta to use it

I think he/she meant convincing Meta to use MLS, not Matrix.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

Now that I read it again, you may be right.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

XMPP is used in many, many places. It's just not usually explicitly known that the backend is using that protocol

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago

You are underplaying the damage Google and FB did to XMPP. It wasn't supposed to be relegated to an obscure backend protocol. The involvement of those companies ensured that it didn't become a popular user-facing protocol.