On the side bar it lists the following:
- [Matrix/Element]Dead
- Discord
"Discord" is an active link, but the Matrix link is completely inactive. Not only is it inactive (which could have be excused as a broken link), but it is also manually labeled as "Dead", as if there is no intention of making it work. How can a community that is focused on privacy willingly favor a service that is privacy non-respecting when a perfectly functional privacy-respecting alternative exists?
It's the timeless debate between accessibility and exclusivity. Do you want more people in your community by compromising some values? Or would you rather be a hardliner but never reach those people?
Most of the time you have to pick somewhere on that spectrum. It's a question of pragmatism and utilitarianism.
Does it do more good for lots of people to be slightly more privacy-aware, or is it better to have a very small portion of the population that are super privacy-aware?
You have to decide, and the debate rages on all the time.
Do you want more people in your community by compromising some values? Or would you rather be a hardliner but never reach those people?
Is there any reason you couldn't have a discord and a matrix channel? It seems to me that would reach the most people.
The issue becomes moderation at that point, not a big problem for a larger community, but small communities tend to struggle with moderation with just one hub of communications.
Also, the hardliners wouldn't be interested in co-existing, that's against their ethics generally.
Yeah it quickly becomes a dick measuring contest and shunning people for using different things. It becomes very black/white views, and have some crazy out of touch takes, like expecting your grandma to self host lol. They also confuse anonymity with privacy, like how not being able to sign up for something with tor and monero is a privacy violation, it's not.
like how not being able to sign up for something with tor and monero is a privacy violation, it’s not.
Note that "secrecy" and "privacy" are often understood in Security lingo as different things. One protects confidentiality, the other one protects anonymity.
It's possible to have one and not the other...
You can have a very private system through onion routing but have the contents of the messages exchanged be in plaintext, open to the public. Nobody will be able to know the one who wrote the message was you. But they can see the message. (then there is privacy, but not secrecy).
Or you can have encrypted communications (say HTTPS) but not DNS over TLS/HTTPS, and/or no ECH, so people in the middle (eg. your ISP) can know exactly that the packages are sent by you and where you sent them, even if their content is encrypted (so you have secrecy, but not privacy).
Most cryptocurrency communities use Discord or Telegram. It's such an embarrasment.
Oh I hate communities that use Telegram. I mean, sure, I guess there's better privacy, but Telegram was just not built for that. Messages always get lost, and there are no channels, which means no info channel, so they have to try and cram everything into the description.
I've used the Discord bridge before; it works pretty well, and allows Matrix users to practice better (identity & tracking) privacy if they want. There is none, in Discord.
It does require (a) the Discord community admin to allow the bridge, and (b) some playing with configuration of the bridge to get banning working.
The biggest issue with Matrix is how privacy-respecting it is. Any public forum with anonymous account creation is subject to spam bots, and requires more work by admins. The biggest complaint about the bridge, and why so many Discord admins do not allow it, is because it greatly increases the spam they have to deal with. Kicking and blocking do work fine through the bridge, but it's still a distraction requiring constant vigilance.
Matrix needs better admin tools (where have we heard that before?) Mjolnir is good, but the freely hosted instance was shut down a year or so ago, so it's not available to casual users. And taking on running a service just for a community bridge is a silly requirement.
My points are, that it's not an either-or, but that it requires work. It's a question of commitment, not possibility. c/privacy could have a Matrix-first, privacy-friendly approach and still offer Discord for privacy casuals; it's just harder.
"I guess people just prefer and are more active on Facebook Messenger"
“I guess people just prefer and are more active on TikTok”
Same reason why people use Google products when they could use something else (and note very often that they can't): it's more convenient because Google products are better. Because Google has the clout to make them better and bury the competition even more. which is the very definition of monopolistic anti-competitiveness.
Element is garbage in my experience. It's just not very user friendly, it's slow, it's bloated (and no wonder, it's a React application) and it's not very stable on the desktop. I tried my best to like it but I just can't: it's awful. And unfortunately, as far as I can tell, that's the best Matrix client out there.
I'm sure the Element people are trying their hardest and I don't fault them. But I'm pretty sure they don't have the resources to make it better, unlike Discord. So people staying on Discord is a self-perpetuating prophecy, until someone commits the resources to make Matrix an easy, fast and attractive proposition.
