undefined

points

[-]

> It’s time accept the loss of “features” and go back to something simpler

I guess I have a hard time understanding these calls to switch to a platform that has even fewer features than the unverified Discord accounts. The blog post is incorrect in claiming that verification will be mandatory. It will only be necessary to access certain features and content. For simple IRC-style chats or even for voice chats with gaming friends, no verification is required.

The average Discord user, or even the 98th percentile user, isn’t going to be looking to switch to a platform that isn’t a replacement for the features they use. They’re just going to not verify their accounts and move on.

by taurath4 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Yet people are en-mass switching from discord. Anonymity on the internet is important for a lot of reasons and is part of why it’s good. If hacker news required an ID to access who’s hiring and ask HN threads, people would move off.

Communities aren’t about the “platform features” they’re about the environment. As for profit CEO after CEO fail to recognize time after time

by Aurornis4 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

> Yet people are en-mass switching from discord.

Some people are, but I would bet money on it being a very small number of people who switch platforms. The HN bubble is not representative of the average user.

This is similar to when HN thought Reddit's userbase was going to shrink after the API changes (it didn't) or when the internet thought Netflix was going to lose subscribers when they cracked down on account sharing (they grew, not shrank).

A few blog posts about people switching to IRC or setting up their own Matrix servers in protest isn't representative of a mass movement.

by outime4 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

It's time to accept that 99% of people will not accept the loss of "features" (not sure why that's in quotes) or move to something objectively inferior for their needs i.e. something that requires more knowledge instead of simply opening an app where everything is ready to use.

Coming from a former heavy IRC user who's not going back except for nostalgia trips.

by zanellato194 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

Only a small handful of people will do something like that. For most people, losing people is a nonstarter

by stackghost4 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

I still use a few niche IRC channels and run my own internal IRC network as a home automation message bus, so I'm a fan of IRC for its simplicity, but honestly: IRC really does need a modernization.

Things like image embeds, "markdown lite" formatting, and cross-device synchronization are now considered table stakes. There are always going to be some EFnet-type grognards who resist progress because reasons, but they should be ignored.

IRCv3 and Ergo support some of what's needed already (and in a backwards-compatible way!) but client support just isn't there yet, particularly on mobile.

by duskwuff3 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

> Things like [...] are now considered table stakes.

One other feature that's absolutely considered table stakes now is persistent server-side history, with the ability to edit and delete messages. Modern chat services are less like IRC, and more like a web forum with live updates.

(Yes, you can poorly emulate server-side history on IRC with a bouncer. That's not enough, and it's a pain for users to set up.)

by wolvoleo3 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

There's also quassel which solves the problem a bit like a bouncer but it's way more integrated, it just loads the scrollback on demand instead of just banging the latest 200 lines into my buffer when I connect. Solves the problem perfectly IMO and there's a really excellent android client.

by duskwuff3 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

It's still not server-side history, though - you can't join a channel and see what happened before you joined, or edit a message you've already sent. It's just a slightly cleaner implementation of an IRC bouncer.

by wolvoleo3 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Hmm no but that's usually a good thing. I've had some late night chats where I knew all the other people around and it would not be so cool if anyone else could just join and scroll back to it.

In fact this is the reason some irc networks blocked matrix bridges at first (they now have settings to disable this)

I'm not saying mainstream people should use IRC though. Matrix is better for that.

by duskwuff3 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

It's situational. In a lot of contexts, especially in large public chats, being able to see history when you join is perfectly fine and good.

Telegram lets group admins choose whether members can see history from before they join, which is the perfect solution (IMO).

by stackghost1 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

>One other feature that's absolutely considered table stakes now is persistent server-side history, with the ability to edit and delete messages.

Indeed.

Ergo offers server-side history but I'm not sure it supports edit/delete yet.