Isn’t Lemmy the perfect chance to create a non-toxic community?

All this said, there have also been some suggestions to make onboarding easier by directing new users to a hardcoded default instance. This may sound like a good idea at first but won’t work well in practice. Running such an instance would take significant time for administration and moderation, but we maintainers are already too busy. Besides it would be impossible to reach an agreement who this default instance should federate with or how exactly it should be moderated. So if you want to get nontechnical users to Lemmy, the solution is to link them directly to a specific instance based on their interests.

Wholeheartedly agree with this. Also people should get use to taking responsibility for their online experiences. Corporations have made people stupid to the point they reject autonomy.

Been saying this forever. They’re Trojan horses designed to make the population of the world provide free labour for Google’s AI ambitions.

As @[email protected] points out, it’s a different article, but the same subject matter. It’s not a duplicate post.

Previous discussion https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/21649585

Previous discussion https://lemmy.world/post/25184448

That was the one. Oh well, I’m outta ideas then. The Fediverse in general is a very trans safe community.

What about the one with that privacy community that got vetoed?

I really like this. This is how monetisation should work.

I feel like I’m wasting my time replying to all these because it seems you didn’t even take the time to read them yourself.

I’m here trying to learn about Delta Chat and why you think it’s a good app given the drawbacks of the approach they’ve taken. Over the years there’s been an incredible amount of messengers pop up, 90 million from Google alone and none have opted for SMTP. There’s surely a reason for that. From what I’ve learned, mostly thanks to Gemini, because holy fuck the Delta Chat website feels like something from 20 years ago and is purposely vague, the solution that Delta has gone for is just to add more layers. Again, something that the world has repeatedly opted against. I’m trying to understand why it’s considered a good idea in this case and why so many teams and startups have decided not to use this methodology until now?

Jesus Christ, being curious shouldn’t feel like a chore.

Downvote for what? What part is wrong?

Regarding SMTP:

SMTP (Simple Mail Transfer Protocol) is a foundational technology for email, but it has some limitations. Here are some ways it could be improved:

• Security: SMTP was designed in a time of less pervasive security threats. It lacks built-in encryption and authentication mechanisms, making it vulnerable to eavesdropping, spoofing, and spam. While extensions like TLS/SSL and authentication methods exist, they are not universally implemented or enforced.

• Efficiency: SMTP is a “chatty” protocol, meaning it involves multiple back-and-forth exchanges between the client and server. This can lead to latency and increased resource consumption, especially for large emails or bulk sending.
• Deliverability: SMTP doesn’t have mechanisms to guarantee email delivery. Emails can get lost, delayed, or filtered as spam. While techniques like SPF, DKIM, and DMARC help, they are not foolproof.
• Features: SMTP is primarily designed for sending emails. It lacks features for managing email content, tracking delivery status, or handling complex email workflows. Possible Improvements:
• Mandatory Encryption: Enforcing TLS/SSL encryption for all SMTP connections would protect email content from interception.
• Stronger Authentication: Implementing more robust authentication mechanisms would prevent spoofing and ensure that emails originate from legitimate senders.
• Enhanced Deliverability: Developing mechanisms to track email delivery, provide feedback on delivery failures, and reduce spam filtering would improve deliverability.
• More Efficient Communication: Exploring alternative protocols or extensions that reduce the “chattiness” of SMTP could improve efficiency.
• Integration with other technologies: Integrating SMTP with other technologies like REST APIs or message queues could enable more complex email workflows and features.

It’s important to note that some of these improvements are already being addressed through extensions and best practices. However, there is still room for improvement in making SMTP a more secure, efficient, and reliable technology.

That said, it looks like Delta Chat doesn’t actually use SMTP, having scanned through the website. Though I’m honestly unsure either way as it was only a scan.

Never mind:

Delta Chat doesn’t use its own proprietary protocol. Instead, it cleverly leverages the existing email infrastructure for message delivery. Here’s how it works:

• Core Protocol: IMAP/SMTP - Delta Chat primarily uses the standard Internet Message Access Protocol (IMAP) for receiving messages and Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP) for sending them. These are the same protocols your regular email client uses.
• Encryption: Autocrypt & OpenPGP - To ensure secure and private communication, Delta Chat implements end-to-end encryption using the Autocrypt standard and the OpenPGP standard. This means your messages are encrypted in such a way that only the intended recipient can decrypt and read them.
• Secure Key Exchange: SecureJoin - Delta Chat also utilizes the SecureJoin protocol for secure key exchange. This helps to prevent man-in-the-middle attacks and ensures that only authorized parties can establish secure communication. In essence, Delta Chat works by:
• Sending encrypted messages as emails: When you send a message in Delta Chat, it’s actually sent as an encrypted email to the recipient’s email address.
• Receiving encrypted messages as emails: Delta Chat constantly checks your email inbox for new encrypted emails that are meant for you.

• Decrypting and displaying messages: When a new encrypted email arrives, Delta Chat decrypts it and displays it to you in the chat interface. This approach has several advantages:

• Decentralization: No central server is required to store your messages, making it more resistant to censorship and single points of failure.
• Openness: It leverages existing email infrastructure, making it interoperable with any email provider.
• Security: End-to-end encryption ensures that your messages remain private and secure.

If you’re interested in learning more about the technical details, you can check out the cryptographic analysis of Delta Chat available on the Cryptology ePrint Archive: https://eprint.iacr.org/2024/918

Because delta chat is using an open protocol (email)

So not an instant messaging protocol but rather a technology that the whole world would do differently if they could go back in time?

It’s not about power tripping, it’s about philosophy. When I left mainstream social media and decided upon the Fediverse, decentralization was very much at the top of the list. I was happy to be part of a world where one corporation wasn’t in control of our lives. I’m just uncomfortable with the way that people are so eager to foster that in world. We shouldn’t have to see them misbehave before we apply what we learned from previous mistakes.

That said, I would like to say that despite the issues with the ML administration, I feel the centralization of communities on WORLD is a far greater and thus more urgent issue for me.