@kekcoin @0 @orionwl He means abused in the sense that it's way more powerful than it has to be for chat purposes. Like abusing a blockchain to do chat. Or a blockchain to do pretty much anything that's not digital cash :D
For chat you need to make sure your message reaches your contact. Pretty much that. If your protocol is about syncing conversations across a network of devices, you're more like some kind of Git + Torrent + Rsync :D
@orionwl @kekcoin @0 Sure history can be important, but for several use cases one does explicitly not want history. So if your protocol is entirely built around the idea of syncing histories, how does one accommodate those scenarios? XMPP has MAM (a protocol for history storage) and it has a protocol for temporary history storage for messages received while offline.
So privacy-aware apps that explicitly don't want history can chose to not use MAM, while it seems they wouldn't work with Matrix.
OTOH in both protocols the server could secretly keep a log, despite user preferences. Only E2E encryption with perfect forward secrecy (which both XMPP and Matrix have in some form) mitigates this.
@orionwl @kekcoin @0 True. And still most (all?) E2EE implementation leave a lot of metadata as well. Some of that is even not possible to remove.
So for that reason, one will always have to somehow trust their server to do certain things for you. Like not keeping secret logs :)
Hosting your own server also help for that. And if you host your own server, keeping no history still makes sense because the server can be confiscated or hacked.
Bitcoin Maston Instance