Let's imagine I have like 2 or 3 reasons to be using discord today, and I'm trying to move them to something else in the next few weeks because I don't intend to give discord my ID.
-
What I think is *really* important in a discord replacement:
1. low friction invite/join/create flow for private or semi-private groups.
2. single login/identity used for multiple groupsAnd that's really all I need, personally. But orgs that make heavier use of discord also need:
3. enough control over roles and permissions to be able to moderate communication (within a group, not across groups) among people who often do not know each other
@jenniferplusplus Our co-op self-hosts Mattermost and its been fine, but I think it has enough settings and knobs to be a viable replacement, especially for orgs who have $$$ to pay for a good option.
-
@jenniferplusplus i would say something like "i hope i'm wrong about this" but i know that'll only bring me irc, matrix, or xmpp evangelism. i'm aware of all three and none of them are anywhere close to replacing discord
revolt/stoat could be interesting but it's centralized so you may as well use zulip if it fits the bill@kopper I mean, I'm kind of hoping that some of those xmpp folks will show up and tell me about the good, low friction option that I just didn't know about.
I think xmpp is the long term answer to this question. I just don't know if it can be the short term one.
-
@kopper I mean, I'm kind of hoping that some of those xmpp folks will show up and tell me about the good, low friction option that I just didn't know about.
I think xmpp is the long term answer to this question. I just don't know if it can be the short term one.
@jenniferplusplus i've just today became aware of a XEP for "discord guilds" (xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0503.html) but it intentionally omits the access control bit so even if it had client support by itself (it's too new to be noticed as far as i can tell) it wouldn't be enough -
@jenniferplusplus i've just today became aware of a XEP for "discord guilds" (xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0503.html) but it intentionally omits the access control bit so even if it had client support by itself (it's too new to be noticed as far as i can tell) it wouldn't be enough@jenniferplusplus (and of course there's someone in the mailing list for arguing for what seems to be "why is this necessary when we can let people create MUCs on subdomains with virtual hosting and use those for that", which doesn't really sound like a replacement from the perspective of someone who actually knows what discord is)
-
RE: https://mastodon.social/@verge/116041069446538092
Let's imagine I have like 2 or 3 reasons to be using discord today, and I'm trying to move them to something else in the next few weeks because I don't intend to give discord my ID.
The other comparable monolithic option appears to be Zulip, which is fine, as far as it goes. But are there good federated options? People are going to have to migrate to another platform, meaning they will have to bootstrap their identity and social connections all over again. It would be great if this was the last time they had to do that
(I'm aware of matrix, matrix is a bad option. I want good options)
@jenniferplusplus For awhile now I've resigned myself to the idea that there probably won't be any good options until somebody does a good implementation of MLS. Personally, I'm planning on going back to IRC. But I'm not the person managing these services.
-
@jenniferplusplus Our co-op self-hosts Mattermost and its been fine, but I think it has enough settings and knobs to be a viable replacement, especially for orgs who have $$$ to pay for a good option.
@blainsmith @jenniferplusplus CERN's internal chat service is Mattermost too, and it's perfectly fine. Better than Slack, certainly. Don't think it does video calls if that's something you like Discord for...
-
RE: https://mastodon.social/@verge/116041069446538092
Let's imagine I have like 2 or 3 reasons to be using discord today, and I'm trying to move them to something else in the next few weeks because I don't intend to give discord my ID.
The other comparable monolithic option appears to be Zulip, which is fine, as far as it goes. But are there good federated options? People are going to have to migrate to another platform, meaning they will have to bootstrap their identity and social connections all over again. It would be great if this was the last time they had to do that
(I'm aware of matrix, matrix is a bad option. I want good options)
@jenniferplusplus I'm already "scheduled for self destruct soon", so my face is safe.
-
@blainsmith @jenniferplusplus CERN's internal chat service is Mattermost too, and it's perfectly fine. Better than Slack, certainly. Don't think it does video calls if that's something you like Discord for...
@aoanla @jenniferplusplus That is very cool to learn. For folks that actually want a completely free version of Mattermost without the message limit you can apply... https://framagit.org/framasoft/framateam/mostlymatter/-/blob/master/limitless.patch
-
RE: https://mastodon.social/@verge/116041069446538092
Let's imagine I have like 2 or 3 reasons to be using discord today, and I'm trying to move them to something else in the next few weeks because I don't intend to give discord my ID.
The other comparable monolithic option appears to be Zulip, which is fine, as far as it goes. But are there good federated options? People are going to have to migrate to another platform, meaning they will have to bootstrap their identity and social connections all over again. It would be great if this was the last time they had to do that
(I'm aware of matrix, matrix is a bad option. I want good options)
@jenniferplusplus Someone posted this - maybe helpful? https://taggart-tech.com/discord-alternatives/
-
What I think is *really* important in a discord replacement:
1. low friction invite/join/create flow for private or semi-private groups.
2. single login/identity used for multiple groupsAnd that's really all I need, personally. But orgs that make heavier use of discord also need:
3. enough control over roles and permissions to be able to moderate communication (within a group, not across groups) among people who often do not know each other
@jenniferplusplus What happened to "better discord" and other projects like it? (I have no idea - I heard folk talking about them many years ago)
-
What I think is *really* important in a discord replacement:
1. low friction invite/join/create flow for private or semi-private groups.
2. single login/identity used for multiple groupsAnd that's really all I need, personally. But orgs that make heavier use of discord also need:
3. enough control over roles and permissions to be able to moderate communication (within a group, not across groups) among people who often do not know each other
@jenniferplusplus I think IRC meets all your requirements? People seem to have forgotten about it, and there are a lot of rough edges, but we’ve had all of this for nearly 40 years.
-
@jenniferplusplus I think IRC meets all your requirements? People seem to have forgotten about it, and there are a lot of rough edges, but we’ve had all of this for nearly 40 years.
@dwineman ok, and also requirement 0, message history and offline delivery. There are actual reasons people stopped using irc
-
@dwineman ok, and also requirement 0, message history and offline delivery. There are actual reasons people stopped using irc
@jenniferplusplus Fair enough. And I believe there were ad hoc solutions to both of those (bots that sat in your channel and could replay history and send notifications, etc.) It’s far from ideal. But if we were to build that ideal system, IRC is a pretty good starting point.
-
@dwineman ok, and also requirement 0, message history and offline delivery. There are actual reasons people stopped using irc
@dwineman @jenniferplusplus yea message history is the fundamental technical challenge that makes the jump from irc to discord-alikes hard, now you need a database somewhere to store all those messages.
-
What I think is *really* important in a discord replacement:
1. low friction invite/join/create flow for private or semi-private groups.
2. single login/identity used for multiple groupsAnd that's really all I need, personally. But orgs that make heavier use of discord also need:
3. enough control over roles and permissions to be able to moderate communication (within a group, not across groups) among people who often do not know each other
In my ideal world, your chat identity would be the same as your social network identity. Your identity documents (aka your AP Actor, ATP DID doc, etc) would include addressing information and signing keys for real time chat protocols like xmpp, and that would be that.
-
In my ideal world, your chat identity would be the same as your social network identity. Your identity documents (aka your AP Actor, ATP DID doc, etc) would include addressing information and signing keys for real time chat protocols like xmpp, and that would be that.
Believe me, I understand why doing this is not straightforward. But it's not impossible, either. The time to start really committing resources to our own communications infrastructure was 8 or 9 years ago. The second best time is now.
-
RE: https://mastodon.social/@verge/116041069446538092
Let's imagine I have like 2 or 3 reasons to be using discord today, and I'm trying to move them to something else in the next few weeks because I don't intend to give discord my ID.
The other comparable monolithic option appears to be Zulip, which is fine, as far as it goes. But are there good federated options? People are going to have to migrate to another platform, meaning they will have to bootstrap their identity and social connections all over again. It would be great if this was the last time they had to do that
(I'm aware of matrix, matrix is a bad option. I want good options)
@jenniferplusplus as others have said, Stoat seems promising. But it isn't federated so you'd just have to self host or be stuck with another monolith
-
In my ideal world, your chat identity would be the same as your social network identity. Your identity documents (aka your AP Actor, ATP DID doc, etc) would include addressing information and signing keys for real time chat protocols like xmpp, and that would be that.
@jenniferplusplus the scary thing, to me, about single identity is how that can be abused by an authoritarian regime... one of the main challenges with creating a technocracy is that there isnt much difference between technocracy and autocracy... it is just the difference related to whom is allowed to define the rules.
-
R relay@relay.infosec.exchange shared this topic
-
@jenniferplusplus the scary thing, to me, about single identity is how that can be abused by an authoritarian regime... one of the main challenges with creating a technocracy is that there isnt much difference between technocracy and autocracy... it is just the difference related to whom is allowed to define the rules.
@scottley Yes. But, nothing about what I proposed would make it required to use a single identity in every instance. It would merely make it possible to use that identity in more than one instance.
That also makes it more vital, which makes it all the more important to protect such an identity anchor from the whims of an administrator (including governments). That's where a lot of the difficulty comes in.
