I am thinking about implementing an open network (over VPN), where the connectivity of nodes depends on their reputation, kind of KarmaNET. Before the internet, misbehaving nodes would be excommunicado, physically disconnected. This is not possible anymore. In this KarmaNET, anyone could generate a key pair and join. New nodes would have 0 reputation though, so far not all other nodes on the network would receive incoming connections from such nodes. In order to gain reputation, one would have to do something useful for the network/people on the network, e.g. write an interesting article, host a ftp server, a public xmpp server, an e-mail service, host a video, etc. That would also naturally incentivize distributed services and prevent spam/scrape. This might be similar to web3 though, or directly use some of its concepts. Main question is how to prevent all sorts of abuses, which are mostly known from social networks, like rapid circular reputation pumping, mass cooperated dislikes, etc.
Well, your big company should then call M$ out then. E.g., consider you're sending a confirmation e-mail during account registration, then when your server detects that relay is `*.oulook.com` show a warning: 'outlook users most probably will not receive emails from us due to bs policy at microsoft. consider using a different email provider.'
Yes, that may turn some users away, but they would complain and leave anyway, because they don't receive emails from your server. On the other hand, that's how one can contribute to unwinding ms's share of email accounts.
Think about what you're saying: someone is near the top of the sales funnel and despite the odds you've convinced them to provide their email so you can start the process of trying to convert. Even if you are good you'll still lose 80% of people from this point before you see a single dollar. Now, inject some extra weird, sketchy-sounding friction AND ask them to change their email provider, something 99% of employees never think about let alone control. Not sure how old you are but you'd have better luck convincing users "this site works best in IE4".
Right, letting users frustrate silently, without explaining to them why they don't receive correspondence is the way to go. Discussing my age/gender/race isn't productive either. Dont rage, just pay attention to what's written. I only suggest them to select a different e-mail for better experience, not reqiring it. And the actual wording of this suggestion should always be developed in collaboration with company's layers and marketing teams.
I use 'Conversations' (from F-Droid) on my Android and self-hosted 'XMPP Web' on my PC
https://github.com/nioc/xmpp-web
This combination covers 99% of my needs.
That's actually done already in XMPP (Jabber). Federativity, voice calls, E2EE, direct and offline file exchange, no sms verification and other bs, max privacy and convenience.
That sounds like perfect match for XMPP / Jabber. You can set up a server on your domain (e.g. 'Prosody') and then two XMPP clients that support calls (e.g. 'Conversations' for android) will be able to initiate voice/video calls, just like in telegram/whatsapp/viber/etc. More over, XMPP works like an e-mail, so user1@xmpp.org can message/call user2@yourdomian.com (if you allow your server to federate with other servers). Setting it up is not very simple though, you'd also need to set up STUN/TURN properly for direct calls and file transfers.
Yes, you're right, matrix too. However, I've tried ruining servers for both, synapse for matrix and prosody for xmpp and I should say matrix felt very sluggish and limited, while prosody is fast and insanely flexible. In addition, client software for XMPP is more diverse and feature-rich, I'm particularly impressed by movim (web) and conversations (android).
Also, there are variety of bridges for everything, e.g. matrix <-> whatsapp or xmpp <-> telegram, so one is not limited too much while committing to a certain messaging tech.
reply