if matrix wants to have any remote grab at relevancy it has to drastically improve the experience of being on matrix.org, despite being a federated protocol.

take the example of mastodon.social:
+ good server, enough for most people's usecases
+ good uptime
+ federates well

matrix.org may be "good enough", but its uptime and poor federation make it a bad introduction to matrix as a platform.

· · Web · 2 · 1 · 2

@hazel rumour has it matrix dot org has bad federation on purpose

like, the devs get paid based on how many people use matrix dot org, or something? which encourages them to put everyone on that one server instead of federating properly

@00dani @hazel ugh, so that misinfo is spreading further :(

There is no such payment structure.

Ask any of the matrix devs and they'll absolutely advice (and help you) to set up your own server.

The (stated) reason matrix.org is still the most prominent server is because there aren't yet enough well running public servers to have something like joinmastodon.org run well,

which is mainly because Synapse is very very badly programmed. Dendrite (by m.o) and Conduit (from the community) are starting to make very good progress now that the federation spec is stable.

@f0x @hazel oh! well thank god for that

(that's why i said "rumour has it", i didn't know for sure)

very glad there's robust matrix servers in the works :blobcat:

@kuba first off, matrix as a protocol kind of has federation as an afterthought IMO, esp with vector.im etc

second off, this is more ranting my frustration with repeated issues talking to people on matrix.org when matrix.org internal comms work fine. federation there seems to break often.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
is not alive

"are you a boy or a girl?"
"im dead!"