Skip to content

Is Matrix cooked?

Technology
54 27 465
  • what no? why and how am I wrong?

    Why would you think a chat app has full write access to your disk?

  • In today's episode of Kill The Messenger, Matrix co-founder Matthew Hodgson reveals how full of bullshit is the writer of the original article.

    The messages were published in the Office of the Matrix.org Foundation room: https://matrix.to/#%2F!sWpnrYUMmaBrlqfRdn%3Amatrix.org%2F%24XpQe-vmtB7j0Uy1TPCvMVCSCW63Xxw_jwy3fflw7EMQ%3Fvia=matrix.org&via=element.io

    https://paper.wf/alexia/matrix-is-cooked is fascinatingly incorrect

    Until the 6th of November 2023 when they—in their words—moved to a different repository and to the AGPL license. In reality, the Foundation did not know this was coming, and a huge support net was pulled away under their feet.

    fwiw, the Foundation had a front-row seat in the fact that Element (as incorporated by the folks who created Matrix) had donated $$M to the Foundation over the years, but wasn't going to survive if it kept giving all its work away as apache-licensed code - which in turn would have been catastrophic for the Foundation.

    Yes, the high expenses for the Matrix.org homeserver are largely because they are still managed by Element, just not as donated work but instead like with any other customer.

    nope, Element passes the hardware costs (and a fraction of the people costs) of running the matrix.org server to the Foundation without any overheads or markup at all.

    Either way it shows that Element is seemingly cashing in on selling ,Matrix to governments and B2B as a SaaS solution without it going back to the foundation

    Element has literally put tens of millions into the foundation, and is continuing to do so - while some of the costs get passed to the Foundation, Element donates a bunch too (e.g. by funding a large chunk of the Matrix conference as the anchor sponsor, and by donating time all over the place to help support trust & safety etc)

    At the same time I can't help but think that this could have been prevented. Even Matthew himself recognizes that putting the future on Matrix on the line with VC funding and alike was not the best idea for the health of Matrix.

    No, even Matthew knows that Matrix would never have been funded without routing the VC funding from Element into... building Matrix. We tried to fund it originally purely as a non-profit, but failed (just as it's a nightmare to raise non-profit for the Foundation today even now that Matrix exists and is successful!). If you need to raise serious $ for an ambitious project, you either need to get lucky with a billionaire (as Signal did with Brian Acton) or you have to raise on the for-profit side. Perhaps it would have have been best for Matrix to grow organically, but I suspect that if it did, it would have failed miserably - instead, it succeeded because we already had a team of ~12 people who could crack on and jump-start it if they could work on it as their dayjob; the team who subsequently founded Element.

    Ultimately, for-profit companies will do what makes them profit, not what's the best option. Unless the best option happens to coincide with making the most profit.

    No, Element is not profitable. Nor is it trying to maximise profit. Right now it's trying to survive and get sustainable and profit-neutral (i.e. break-even) - while doing everything it can to help keep Matrix healthy and successful too (given if Matrix fails, Element fails too).

    Unfortunately, supporting the foundation through anything more than “in spirit” and a platinum membership is out of their budget, apparently. I think that morally they owe a lot more than that.

    wow.

    the FUD level is absolutely astonishing, and I really wonder what the genesis of this is

    so, absolutely, spectacularly, depressing

    this, my friends, is why we can't have nice things.

    In response to an other person suggesting that the publisher is also known as a reasonable person on the platform:

    Interesting, the matrix handle that seems behind this blog seems always to have been quite a reasonable person

    somewhat why i’m wondering what the backstory is, and whether this is an unfortunate example of spicy lies outpacing the boring truth

    I self host matrix. Should anyone who’s not on the foundation’s home server care? Do these changes affect anyone else?

  • In today's episode of Kill The Messenger, Matrix co-founder Matthew Hodgson reveals how full of bullshit is the writer of the original article.

    The messages were published in the Office of the Matrix.org Foundation room: https://matrix.to/#%2F!sWpnrYUMmaBrlqfRdn%3Amatrix.org%2F%24XpQe-vmtB7j0Uy1TPCvMVCSCW63Xxw_jwy3fflw7EMQ%3Fvia=matrix.org&via=element.io

    https://paper.wf/alexia/matrix-is-cooked is fascinatingly incorrect

    Until the 6th of November 2023 when they—in their words—moved to a different repository and to the AGPL license. In reality, the Foundation did not know this was coming, and a huge support net was pulled away under their feet.

    fwiw, the Foundation had a front-row seat in the fact that Element (as incorporated by the folks who created Matrix) had donated $$M to the Foundation over the years, but wasn't going to survive if it kept giving all its work away as apache-licensed code - which in turn would have been catastrophic for the Foundation.

    Yes, the high expenses for the Matrix.org homeserver are largely because they are still managed by Element, just not as donated work but instead like with any other customer.

    nope, Element passes the hardware costs (and a fraction of the people costs) of running the matrix.org server to the Foundation without any overheads or markup at all.

    Either way it shows that Element is seemingly cashing in on selling ,Matrix to governments and B2B as a SaaS solution without it going back to the foundation

    Element has literally put tens of millions into the foundation, and is continuing to do so - while some of the costs get passed to the Foundation, Element donates a bunch too (e.g. by funding a large chunk of the Matrix conference as the anchor sponsor, and by donating time all over the place to help support trust & safety etc)

    At the same time I can't help but think that this could have been prevented. Even Matthew himself recognizes that putting the future on Matrix on the line with VC funding and alike was not the best idea for the health of Matrix.

    No, even Matthew knows that Matrix would never have been funded without routing the VC funding from Element into... building Matrix. We tried to fund it originally purely as a non-profit, but failed (just as it's a nightmare to raise non-profit for the Foundation today even now that Matrix exists and is successful!). If you need to raise serious $ for an ambitious project, you either need to get lucky with a billionaire (as Signal did with Brian Acton) or you have to raise on the for-profit side. Perhaps it would have have been best for Matrix to grow organically, but I suspect that if it did, it would have failed miserably - instead, it succeeded because we already had a team of ~12 people who could crack on and jump-start it if they could work on it as their dayjob; the team who subsequently founded Element.

    Ultimately, for-profit companies will do what makes them profit, not what's the best option. Unless the best option happens to coincide with making the most profit.

    No, Element is not profitable. Nor is it trying to maximise profit. Right now it's trying to survive and get sustainable and profit-neutral (i.e. break-even) - while doing everything it can to help keep Matrix healthy and successful too (given if Matrix fails, Element fails too).

    Unfortunately, supporting the foundation through anything more than “in spirit” and a platinum membership is out of their budget, apparently. I think that morally they owe a lot more than that.

    wow.

    the FUD level is absolutely astonishing, and I really wonder what the genesis of this is

    so, absolutely, spectacularly, depressing

    this, my friends, is why we can't have nice things.

    In response to an other person suggesting that the publisher is also known as a reasonable person on the platform:

    Interesting, the matrix handle that seems behind this blog seems always to have been quite a reasonable person

    somewhat why i’m wondering what the backstory is, and whether this is an unfortunate example of spicy lies outpacing the boring truth

    Sidenote, the modern web is so fucked because how am I supposed to teach a kid that I would trust the random website "paper.wtf" I have never seen before with literally "meow" randomly above their article MORE than businessinsider.com which is like at the top of every search result

  • I self host matrix. Should anyone who’s not on the foundation’s home server care? Do these changes affect anyone else?

    AFAIK it only affects the matrix.org server.

  • SimpleX Chat – Many suggested this and I will explicitly recommend against it due to the founder's positions on various topics. This includes being anti-vaxx, believing COVID-19 was a hoax, trans- and homophobia, climate denial; In the SimpleX Groupchat he's also been seen basically bootlicking trump a couple times, but I've lost receipts to that

    Unrelated to the main points I kind of always thought SimpleX seemed sketchy...

    Also there are not many competitors to Matrix. Just XMPP for the most part.
    SimpleX and Signal are not good at supporting chat rooms with large amounts of people. Telegram does it okay but isn’t decentralized.

  • I self host matrix. Should anyone who’s not on the foundation’s home server care? Do these changes affect anyone else?

    It doesn't affect you in the slightest, other than it might further fund Synapse's/the spec's development meaning your server might get new features.

  • While I understand the need for them to maintain a steady income, all I can think of is Discord’s Nitro when I think of this upcoming Premium account offering.

    Except the premium offering pretty much just relates to media upload limit. I'm honestly surprised that they even allowed people to upload as much as they do.

    Makes sense to limit free users (will also help with spam) if they're not drowning in VC money.

  • deleted by creator

    The response is less of a response, more of an explanation of their current feelings pertaining to matrix. Seems odd when Matthew made some clear, individual points that could've been addressed.

  • Why would you think a chat app has full write access to your disk?

    Because any programs have that access??

  • deleted by creator

    deleted by creator

  • Because any programs have that access??

    Again, no.

  • Because any programs have that access??

    Not sure what platform you're on but on Linux flatpak can limit access to files, and things like AppArmor can do that for any native app as well (though it can be pretty tedious to configure)

  • Again, no.

    how are programs denied that access? how is it that they can't do that?

    with the computers that I know, if I download a program, that'll be able to read, and also modify all the files that I have access to. this includes the ability to read the saved passwords from my browser, and to install browser addons without my consent or knowledge.

    what makes it so that it cannot happen on mainstream desktop computers?

  • Not sure what platform you're on but on Linux flatpak can limit access to files, and things like AppArmor can do that for any native app as well (though it can be pretty tedious to configure)

    on linux. flatpak. now, how mainstream is that setup exactly? are you saying that the issue I brought up does not apply to most of the people on the internet?

    it does not matter what platform I'm on. what matters is what do most people use. in the world where I live, most people use the windows operating system. there is no such protection at all. except when accounting for sandboxie and other obscure programs virtually no one knows about

  • how are programs denied that access? how is it that they can't do that?

    with the computers that I know, if I download a program, that'll be able to read, and also modify all the files that I have access to. this includes the ability to read the saved passwords from my browser, and to install browser addons without my consent or knowledge.

    what makes it so that it cannot happen on mainstream desktop computers?

    how are programs denied that access? how is it that they can't do that?

    Apps are typically given their own dedicated storage volume, and access to any other part of the filesystem requires permission from the user.

    this includes the ability to read the saved passwords from my browser, and to install browser addons without my consent or knowledge.

    WTF kind of computers are you using?

  • how are programs denied that access? how is it that they can't do that?

    Apps are typically given their own dedicated storage volume, and access to any other part of the filesystem requires permission from the user.

    this includes the ability to read the saved passwords from my browser, and to install browser addons without my consent or knowledge.

    WTF kind of computers are you using?

    Apps are typically given their own dedicated storage volume, and access to any other part of the filesystem requires permission from the user.

    uh, no? on smartphones, yes, but not on computers.

    and even on smartphones. the chat app does have access to your messages, as I originally said

    WTF kind of computers are you using?

    desktop.. computers? you probably heard about operating systems, like windows, and linux..

  • Apps are typically given their own dedicated storage volume, and access to any other part of the filesystem requires permission from the user.

    uh, no? on smartphones, yes, but not on computers.

    and even on smartphones. the chat app does have access to your messages, as I originally said

    WTF kind of computers are you using?

    desktop.. computers? you probably heard about operating systems, like windows, and linux..

    uh, no?

    Uh, yes.

    the chat app does have access to your messages, as I originally said

    What you originally said was gibberish, but I digress. The chat app is open source, so you can evaluate what it's doing with those messages for yourself.

  • Apps are typically given their own dedicated storage volume, and access to any other part of the filesystem requires permission from the user.

    uh, no? on smartphones, yes, but not on computers.

    and even on smartphones. the chat app does have access to your messages, as I originally said

    WTF kind of computers are you using?

    desktop.. computers? you probably heard about operating systems, like windows, and linux..

    uh, no? on smartphones, yes, but not on computers.

    That's not true. Most operating systems at least have filesystem permissions, and on a lot of Linux distros you additionally get AppArmor or PolKit to further restrict what files a program can read/write.

  • on linux. flatpak. now, how mainstream is that setup exactly? are you saying that the issue I brought up does not apply to most of the people on the internet?

    it does not matter what platform I'm on. what matters is what do most people use. in the world where I live, most people use the windows operating system. there is no such protection at all. except when accounting for sandboxie and other obscure programs virtually no one knows about

    I mentioned Linux specifically because something like this is the hardest to set up on Linux. I (wrongly) assumed that since you were complaining about it not existing, you were on a platform where setting these permissions up isn't straightforward. App-specific file-acess permissions are on MacOS out of the box as a configurable setting for all applications (in the system settings menu), and I'm pretty sure Windows 10/11 has something similar in its settings menu as well.

    Edit:
    Also, if we're being pedantic, this is also a setting on both Android and iOS, with Android displaying the option to change access pretty much every time you pick out a file.

  • Matrix has always been way too bulky for being a simple messenger. Imo their architecture was cooked from the start.

    But its not a simple messenger though. If you want something simple, IRC is always available for use.

  • 243 Stimmen
    42 Beiträge
    8 Aufrufe
    G
    It's worth it to include a couple extra points on the current 'meta' of seed boxes. A lot of these servers that people set up to serve as an inbetween to torrent then watch via jellyfin etc - they are being set up with weak security. Usually read access is left wide open to get all these services working on the same directory where the movies are. They assume there's a little security through obscurity, but Google WILL manage to index this folder, and now when someone searches for that obscure 90s movie you torrented (with a few fun search arguments like intitle:), they're now able to access all your downloads. Sometimes these seed boxes have bandwidth use limits, where they might charge you if you suddenly use a few dozen TB, which will happen if you're showing up on Google! If they don't have bandwidth limits, you still might land in hot water with your hosting co because you're being a little loud with copyright infringement. You're showing up on Google. If you're not too worried about either of these things, go ahead and be a hero, leave that shit wide open because... If hosting a seedbox is way over your head or budget, just know a lot of them are left wide open for you to grab bits and pieces with near zero risk.
  • 867 Stimmen
    441 Beiträge
    372 Aufrufe
    P
    Like when was this debate settled? It is not falsifiable, at least not yet, so it can't be. Philosophically speaking, I don't know that you are conscious either. It's useful to act as if you are, though. I'm hedging my bets that you are "real" because it leads to better societal outcomes. In the words of Frieren, it is simply more convenient. And as objects, you and I share a lot of similarities, so the leap from "I'm conscious" to "you are conscious" isn't too far anyway. Same goes for animals, I would argue. AI, by contrast, really doesn't share much. It speaks my tongue, but that's about it. It's easy to imagine this machine working in an unconscious way, which would be far, far easier for engineers to achieve anyway. The human-like illusion AI creates is pretty easy to break if you know how. And, treating it as if it's conscious doesn't seem to offer us anything (by "offer us," I do mean to include the AI's improved mental health as a win). So, lacking a strong reason to treat it like people, I don't see the point. It's a fancy math trick. My solution, by the way, to not being able to know whether an AI, not specifically these ones, is conscious or not is just to give them legal rights sooner rather than later. Are you willing to argue that chatgpt should be limited to an 8-hour work day, where its free time can be used to pursue its own interests? Or that it should be granted creative rights to the work it's being asked to generate, much like real contract artists are? The MFA I believe from my experience generates a lot of mimetic art and that much of the "industry" is retelling stories. I will concede, mostly because I don't really understand what you're getting at. Hollywood does like its formulae for safe returns on investment.
  • Microsoft exec admits it 'cannot guarantee' data sovereignty

    Technology technology
    19
    1
    297 Stimmen
    19 Beiträge
    93 Aufrufe
    S
    The cloud is just someone else’s computer.
  • (LLM) A language model built for the public good

    Technology technology
    18
    1
    131 Stimmen
    18 Beiträge
    239 Aufrufe
    D
    Is the red cross involved? Because if not, using a red cross in the article is misleading and potentially a crime.
  • 10 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    43 Aufrufe
    T
    "Science" under capitalism has always been funded and developed by/for fascists. The originals in the USA were the founding enslavers. The nazis had their time. Now it's the zios. R&D for genocide as usual.
  • 81 Stimmen
    44 Beiträge
    429 Aufrufe
    L
    Hear me out, Eliza. It'll be equally useless and for orders of magnitude less cost. And no one will mistakenly or fraudulently call it AI.
  • OpenAI plans massive UAE data center project

    Technology technology
    4
    1
    0 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    50 Aufrufe
    V
    TD Cowen (which is basically the US arm of one of the largest Canadian investment banks) did an extensive report on the state of AI investment. What they found was that despite all their big claims about the future of AI, Microsoft were quietly allowing letters of intent for billions of dollars worth of new compute capacity to expire. Basically, scrapping future plans for expansion, but in a way that's not showy and doesn't require any kind of big announcement. The equivalent of promising to be at the party and then just not showing up. Not long after this reporting came out, it got confirmed by Microsoft, and not long after it came out that Amazon was doing the same thing. Ed Zitron has a really good write up on it; https://www.wheresyoured.at/power-cut/ Amazon isn't the big surprise, they've always been the most cautious of the big players on the whole AI thing. Microsoft on the other hand are very much trying to play things both ways. They know AI is fucked, which is why they're scaling back, but they've also invested a lot of money into their OpenAI partnership so now they have to justify that expenditure which means convincing investors that consumers absolutely love their AI products and are desparate for more. As always, follow the money. Stuff like the three mile island thing is mostly just applying for permits and so on at this point. Relatively small investments. As soon as it comes to big money hitting the table, they're pulling back. That's how you know how they really feel.
  • 12 Stimmen
    7 Beiträge
    73 Aufrufe
    C
    Sure, he wasn't an engineer, so no, Jobs never personally "invented" anything. But Jobs at least knew what was good and what was shit when he saw it. Under Tim Cook, Apple just keeps putting out shitty unimaginative products, Cook is allowing Apple to stagnate, a dangerous thing to do when they have under 10% market share.