• unknowing8343@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    Google’s work could encourage the adoption of MLS, much as it did with RCS.

    How can you say what Google has done is “encouraging RCS”? They literally monopolised it.

    • Skull giver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      RCS has been around since the early 2010s and absolutely nobody used it until Google did. You had to download carrier specific apps, which then only worked with other people who downloaded their carrier specific apps, because nobody bothered to write unofficial ones. Carriers have been shutting down their RCS servers for years because their customers didn’t care. Google is the only reason anyone uses RCS, if it weren’t for them we’d still be on SMS/MMS.

      • unknowing8343@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        What??

        The RCS API on Android is only available to Google Messages and whomever Google allows (like Samsung Messages when they existed). This is the reality.

        If the RCS API was truly open there would be an explosion of FOSS alternatives to Google’s spyware.

      • BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        RCS has been around since 2010

        15 years and it’s still problematic? Sounds like something that just needs to be let go.

        Stop pushing this garbage that’s tied to hardware/sim/phone number on us. What value is that for the end user, seriously? Why would an end user today want a messenger that’s tied to a phone number?

        Fully-functional, cross-platform, network-based, open-source instant messaging has been available (even on mobile) since 2009, maybe earlier.

        What I always ask about RCS: who benefits today from a messaging system that’s hard-bound to a phone number?

        • Skull giver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          5 months ago

          The value for the end user, the way Apple and Google do it, is that it works on every phone. It was always intended to be the next generation of MMS messaging. RCS, as designed, never had companies like Google run their own servers, but Google had to because many carriers never bothered to set up RCS in the first place.

          Who benefits today? Everyone sharing chat groups with iMessage people. I avoid iMessage but millions of people are stuck with text messaging or ostracised for breaking group messaging (because SMS and MMS are terrible).

          Furthermore, RCS isn’t just text messaging. The standard also contains digital payments and video calls. It’s an open (to carriers) alternative to iMessage that has features ready to go that Signal doesn’t even implement yet.

          Communication is literally what phone numbers are for.

  • iiGxC@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    Except it’s not all messaging apps cause google messages is the only android messaging app with rcs support

        • Blisterexe@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          The idea of standards like that is that the company cant collect data, obviously that wont stop google.

          But the nice thing is that it means you can talk to people who refuse to install signal or matrix from those apps, once the protocol is established

  • christophski@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    Does this protocol actually mean arbitrary cross-app messaging or would that require the app developers to coordinate in some way?

    • Skull giver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      5 months ago

      MLS is just the message encryption part, the MIMI working group is working on a standard that would also open up cross app messaging, using MLS for security. Of course, app developers would need to implement that first. Given the EU is forcing some of these companies to open up their services, it’s possible app developers will choose MLS to do this (for EU citizens). Meta itself has several people in the MIMI working group, for instance.

      • BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        They’re working on something other protocols have had for years. 🤦🏼‍♂️

        • Skull giver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          5 months ago

          Yes, because other federated protocols (email, XMPP, Matrix) don’t have the same features modern messengers have and don’t interoperate with other protocols well. I don’t think XMPP OTR or OMEMO are RFC standards either, they’re just extensions on top of XMPP.

          Some XMPP people are part of the conversation and Matrix is already moving to adopting MLS, so clearly “just use x” wasn’t an option, even for them.

          • christophski@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            I doubt it will ever happen but it would be amazing if I could just have one messaging app and message whomever I want on whatever platform I wanted, without having to using some crazy bridges.

    • BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      With you.

      Fuck RCS. It’s trash. Who benefits from a messenger, in the 21st century, that’s tied to a phone number?