this post was submitted on 08 Aug 2023
186 points (97.4% liked)

Asklemmy

43898 readers
1110 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy πŸ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] rufus@discuss.tchncs.de -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Using eMail for video chat isn’t really an option.

Lol. That's not how anything works. You also cannot use a hammer to replace the SSD in your computer. Sometimes you need to pick up a screwdriver instead.

What you want is the 'everything app'. Go ahead and talk to Elon Musk. See how that is progressing πŸ™ƒ

[–] squaresinger@feddit.de 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You can't use You can't use Slack for Video Calls? Or Teams? Or Signal? Or Threema? Or WhatsApp? Or Facebook Messenger? Or almost any other 1:1 chat app/protocol that survived long enough?

All of my examples were originally text-only messengers meant for sending text messages, pretty similar to email.

And even email didn't stay completely "pure", as, over time, it evolved file attachments.

[–] Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 year ago

By this logic you would be using email for video calls if you just patch in a Jira widget in your email client

[–] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Those are all apps that implement multiple different protocols to do chat/audio/video. Also none of those are federated to my knowledge, you can't chat as a teams user with someone on whatsapp. Lemmy and kbin can talk to each other, just like outlook and Gmail and Hotmail can.

[–] squaresinger@feddit.de 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Yes, now please check the title and content of the OP.

The whole discussion is about the downsides of federated protocols/apps/systems vs non-fedreated ones.

And my point was that it's much easier to expand non-federated software.

[–] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm not sure you can make that argument. It's more about having a dedicated developer base than federation. FOSS has almost always been behind corporate development, that's not really a downside of federation itself.

[–] squaresinger@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago

The whole system behind eMail (all the protocols involved and all the software implementing it) has been built by FOSS and non-FOSS, commercial and non-commercial entities.

Over the decades there were enormous amounts of money and enthusiast labour on it.

And still it's really hard to make sure that the address in the "From:" field is actually the one that sent the email. And if you try to do something trivial like sending an encrypted message to a random email user, chances are almost zero that that user is actually able to read the encrypted email, because it requires additional configuration.

There were >40 years of time, millions of man hours and billions of dollars have been invested in the eMail system, and yet trivial things that pretty much every major messaging service has are still outlandish for eMail.

And not even Gmail, with all their money, managed to fix these issues.