Conversation

Notices

1. Dzuk (dzuk@weirder.earth)'s status on Tuesday, 29-Mar-2022 00:07:22 UTC Dzuk

   From seeing the broad overviews of EU's DMA, I think most of it is very well thought out and sound. The area I think it completely faceplants at is the requirements for messenger inter-operability.

   This is a nice idea in theory but IMO chats are like railroads, they're naturally monopolistic. When you try to make chat systems interoperable, prepare for a bunch of messages saying 'this message type isn't compatible with your client'.

   • Dzuk (dzuk@weirder.earth)'s status on Tuesday, 29-Mar-2022 00:07:20 UTC Dzuk

     in reply to

     The way the UK's railway was run from the early 90's to now was a completely failed experimentation in bringing 'market competition' to a naturally monopolistic thing. It was fucking awful, and the UK is giving up on it next year.

     Santa Claes 🇸🇪🇭🇰🎅 likes this.
   • Dzuk (dzuk@weirder.earth)'s status on Tuesday, 29-Mar-2022 00:07:21 UTC Dzuk

     in reply to

     I think this is a recurring thing where well-meaning EU legislation results in UX nightmares and a non-fix to a solution; see GDPR notices.

   • Dzuk (dzuk@weirder.earth)'s status on Tuesday, 29-Mar-2022 00:07:21 UTC Dzuk

     in reply to

     If chat messages stick to the standard laid out by their creators; then 95% of people are just gonna go for the default client. If they don't, it's gonna become the purview of the technically inclined and the philosophically motivated; see XMPP, IRC and Matrix.

     Messengers also just don't make money like other services; WhatsApp, FBM and Google's shit are all garden walling and user tracking, iMessage is a value-add and lock-in, Telegram is a rich dude's money sink with a failed ICO.

   • Dzuk (dzuk@weirder.earth)'s status on Tuesday, 29-Mar-2022 00:07:21 UTC Dzuk

     in reply to

     So, there's no reasonable way to increase 'market competition' while keeping the same level of user friendliness, there's no real business to compete in other than unethical ones, it's just all-round quite a useless bit of legislation IMO.

     Santa Claes 🇸🇪🇭🇰🎅 likes this.
   • Dzuk (dzuk@weirder.earth)'s status on Tuesday, 29-Mar-2022 00:07:27 UTC Dzuk

     in reply to

     well, I'll add that with iMessage, I don't think it's particularly unethical actually. While it is legitimate lock-in, it's also admitting business constraints - iPhone users only get the service because the purchase of the device subsidises the cost of the service, which is a pretty reasonable thing to do. Much better than providing a service you can't keep in the VC vein of business operations.

     Santa Claes 🇸🇪🇭🇰🎅 likes this.
   • Dzuk (dzuk@weirder.earth)'s status on Tuesday, 29-Mar-2022 00:19:07 UTC Dzuk

     in reply to

     • Stoori Raisiolainen

     @Stoori I think it's important to say that it's not really de-privatisation so much as centralisation.

     They are adopting the TfL model, so services may be contracted out to third parties, but the state will be doing all of the coordinating; including on ticketing and timetables.

     The new body that will replace all this (and Network Rail) will be called Great British Railways. There's a detailed assessment/plan here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/great-british-railways-williams-shapps-plan-for-rail

   • Stoori Raisiolainen (stoori@polyglot.city)'s status on Tuesday, 29-Mar-2022 00:19:08 UTC Stoori Raisiolainen

     in reply to

     @dzuk oh! i haven't heard of this deprivatisation thing, which is of course great news! do you have any more info at hand, or could you say what the relevant search terms for this could be, i'd really much like to read more about it.

     Santa Claes 🇸🇪🇭🇰🎅 repeated this.