With Meta starting to actually implement ActivityPub, I think it would be a good idea to remind everyone of what they are most likely going to do.

  • MudMan@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Man, I’m not gonna relitigate this but no, Google Talk didn’t kill XMPP. XMPP is not, in fact, dead. WhatsApp killed Google Talk and pretty much every other competitor and XMPP would have been in that boat with or without Google Talk.

    This is gonna keep coming up, it’s gonna keep being wrong and I’m really not gonna bother picking this fight each and every single time.

    • yamanii@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Both you and the writer claim to have been there back then, but have wildly different ideas for what happened… Were you a dev on XMPP too?

      • amki@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        An XMPP developer would likely have been delusional about the protocol he himself developed. But at the time I can assure you XMPP was completely irrelevant. AIM/ICQ/MSN/Yahoo! and maybe IRC were the tools of the day back then.

        Because of actual competition (which XMPP had absolutely no part in) multi protocol messengers had their golden age then.

    • lily33@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Well, people like to think that the fediverse is a genuine threat to Meta. And they like to feel they’re doing important work defending it from Meta. So this will indeed pop up again, and again, and again.

      • MudMan@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        They do? I mean, a few times I did have to point out that Meta has multiple products breaking 2 billion active users, so the “fediverse” is a drop in the ocean, but not many people seem to stick with that argument after a quick bout of googling.

    • Sphks@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      And Reddit killed phpBB (kind of).
      And phpBB killed the newsgroups.
      Etc.

      You are right. Convenience killed the previous “protocol”.

    • lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      You saying that XMPP is not dead?

      Name 10 active generalist servers.

      No, really, it would be good to know. I haven’t been able to find active XMPP communities since ca. 2015.

      • MudMan@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        Hah. Alright, it’s not deader than it would have been had Google not stepped in and then stepped out. We’re grading “dead” late 2000s instant messaging apps on a bit of a curve here.

    • RT Redréovič@feddit.ch
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      Did you bother to read the article or did you only decide to write this argument w/o any substantial basis?

      • MudMan@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Oh, I read it when it came out back in June. Many times, as it kept being shared as an explanation of the first Threads backlash.

        It’s full of incorrect assessments and false equivalences.

        Threads doesn’t really have the volume (yet) to subsume ActivityPub. The process it describes for standards drifting towards the corporate actor doesn’t apply to ActivityPub, whcih is engineered from the ground up to support multiple apps with differnent functionality (hence me writing this in Kbin and others reading it in Lemmy and being able to link it and follow it from Mastodon), the article only acknowledges that XMPP survived and kept on going at the very end as a throaway and doesn’t justify how it “never recovered” and, like I said, it doesn’t acknowledge the real reasons Talk and every Google successor to Talk struggled and collapsed.

        So yes, I read it. Past the headline and everything. I just didn’t take it at face value. This piece keeps getting shared because XMPP wasn’t ever that big to begin with, so this sounds erudite and informed while the similar arguments being made at the time about SMTP and RSS were more obviously identifiable as being wrong for the same reasons.