arcterus

Matrix is fragmented too, but it’s generally less fragmented in my experience (if you use a relatively well developed client). Part of this is because most people just use Synapse for their server. With XMPP, server implementations support random combinations of XEPs, and specific servers often are missing random XEPs because they’re not enabled by default and so on (thinking about ejabberd for instance here, the default config probably isn’t what most people want). I also routinely have random compatibility problems between clients pop up with XMPP. As a basic example, retracting messages is very haphazard.

Anyway, yeah, if they standardize on server and client setup for all govt instances, it’d be fine either way probably. The clients may be somewhat janky, but they can probably fix those issues more easily when they’re only focused on one client (although unless it’s like FluffyChat and cross-platform, they may need to standardize multiple clients) and server.

I think there have been some attempts to do so, but they’re just not good enough (and/or end up dead after a while).

The biggest problem with XMPP is what various servers and clients implement is kind of all over the place. For instance, most clients support an older version of OMEMO, but some clients support newer versions, and the different versions are incompatible.

The other issue is some platforms (iOS in particular) have pretty shitty XMPP apps filled with bugs.

I still generally like XMPP more than Matrix since ATM Matrix clients are also filled with bugs/laggy, Synapse (the main server implementation) is very resource heavy, and message syncing is kind of shit if the client doesn’t implement sliding sync (like FluffyChat). I personally think the UI for both XMPP and Matrix clients generally kind of suck, which isn’t great for convincing non-techy people to use them.

Except it is still encrypted to the intended recipient. As the other commenter said, WhatsApp is just another “member” of the group that you can’t see. Basically all they’d have to do is have a server somewhere functioning as a WhatsApp client. Your client sends the message to your intended recipient. It also then sends the message to their “client.” The routing server for the messages can’t decrypt the messages. All the messages are still encrypted per-member of the group and can’t be decrypted until it hits the ends, but WhatsApp is basically a mole siphoning all your messages and storing them.

Obviously it’s deceptive. But if you individually encrypt the messages you’re sending, the one you send to the receiver still can’t be decrypted by Meta, only the copy sent directly to Meta can, so the copy sent to your intended receiver is still “E2EE.”

So, is it basically treating every message as a “group” message where it sends it to some system WhatsApp account and then also to your intended receiver? This is what I’m assuming based on them supposedly being able to see deleted messages. Also would let them say it’s technically still “E2EE” since it’s indeed E2EE to your receiver, but it’s also E2EE to them as well.

I do, but more importantly there are translation earbuds and stuff, and people can also just use their phone with paired wireless earbuds. Sometimes people already move to another country and don’t really bother learning the language because they can sort of get by. I imagine the number of people who do that would increase if they can just rely on their phone or earbuds to accurately translate everything for them (more so with a phone and paired earbuds since it can then both listen and speak for you).

Also, I imagine a number of people learn English and largely just use it to read or listen to stuff on the internet. If they can just automatically translate it without issues like missing phrases and other errors, then they might not learn it, which could in turn harm e.g. their employment prospects if they move abroad. This could apply to other languages too, but English is basically the default language on the internet so it’s an obvious example.

This is an unfortunate issue since I think stuff like machine translation is incredibly useful as an individual, but the better it gets the less need there is for human translators for commissioned projects. At least it’s still really obvious when machine translation is used without thorough editing, so high quality translation still requires humans. A lot of foreign games and other stuff that isn’t super high budget don’t really seem to care about quality and consider the AI “good enough” though :/

Another concern I have with machine translation getting better is it discouraging people from learning foreign languages since they can just rely on AI to translate it for them.

AI is doing 90% of the computer programming to build Anthropic’s products, including its own AI

This explains a lot tbh.