So you were aware that this announcement includes fixes for the encryption issues, yet you decided to post a comment complaining about them anyway, ignoring the point of this post and giving readers the false impression that the issues are unaddressed.
And you did it just to contradict someone who finds the project useful.
That’s not helpful to anyone. Quite the opposite, I’d say.
Too much in the open source community is people saying this is great! Always has been. You shouldn’t crap on people being honest about the problems that have existed, because track record is important
You shouldn’t crap on people being honest about the problems that have existed,
I haven’t “crapped on” anyone. I just pointed out that a comment, which was an absolute declaration in present tense, is misleading, poorly informed, and needlessly quarrelsome. Because it is. And the author then tried to justify it by putting words (“has always been”) in someone else’s mouth. None of that is honest. It was arguing in bad faith, and it’s important to call that sort of thing out, because letting it go is how misinformation spreads.
If they had instead just presented their view as historical experience to help inform about track record, I wouldn’t have taken issue with it.
Too much in the open source community is people saying this is great!
Perhaps, although that’s common around proprietary software as well.
Great is subjective. Matrix has struggled with some problems that rightly frustrated people, but it also has accomplished some things that no other messaging platform has. By that measure, it is a great project. And the announcement we’re all discussing here demonstrates that it is getting better. Just as barkingspiders said.
I replied to an answer here. Not to the blog post.
By that, I referred to the quality of this answer concerning the past, to be more precise to the last three years, we‘ve been using Matrix at work, struggeling with these shortcomings.
Your personal shortcomings concerning either the use of Lemmy and/or discussions in general are sad, but not my problem.
So you were aware that this announcement includes fixes for the encryption issues, yet you decided to post a comment complaining about them anyway, ignoring the point of this post and giving readers the false impression that the issues are unaddressed.
And you did it just to contradict someone who finds the project useful.
That’s not helpful to anyone. Quite the opposite, I’d say.
Too much in the open source community is people saying this is great! Always has been. You shouldn’t crap on people being honest about the problems that have existed, because track record is important
I haven’t “crapped on” anyone. I just pointed out that a comment, which was an absolute declaration in present tense, is misleading, poorly informed, and needlessly quarrelsome. Because it is. And the author then tried to justify it by putting words (“has always been”) in someone else’s mouth. None of that is honest. It was arguing in bad faith, and it’s important to call that sort of thing out, because letting it go is how misinformation spreads.
If they had instead just presented their view as historical experience to help inform about track record, I wouldn’t have taken issue with it.
Perhaps, although that’s common around proprietary software as well.
Great is subjective. Matrix has struggled with some problems that rightly frustrated people, but it also has accomplished some things that no other messaging platform has. By that measure, it is a great project. And the announcement we’re all discussing here demonstrates that it is getting better. Just as barkingspiders said.
I replied to an answer here. Not to the blog post.
By that, I referred to the quality of this answer concerning the past, to be more precise to the last three years, we‘ve been using Matrix at work, struggeling with these shortcomings.
Your personal shortcomings concerning either the use of Lemmy and/or discussions in general are sad, but not my problem.