24 maj 2013 kl. 11:00 skrev Dave Cridland <[email protected]>:

> On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 12:25 AM, Peter Saint-Andre <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> On 5/23/13 4:50 PM, Justin Uberti wrote:
> > I just realized my statement could be parsed 2 different ways. To
> > be clear: it is sad that spammers were more willing to adopt
> > XMPP*than other IM networks were willing to*. Believe me, we
> > tried.
> 
> I completely agree!
> 
> 
> Ah, that makes a lot more sense, yes.
> 
> Though I'd still point out that in terms of federating XMPP enterprises, and 
> so on, there's a lot of domains which *could* federate.
> 
> Some 15,000 Lync domains potentially, for instance.
> 
> Don't you feel embarrassed that Microsoft is now better at open standards 
> than Google in this area? :-)
>  
> It's interesting that open federation is taken for granted in email
> (perhaps because people think it's always been that way, even though
> it wasn't always that way), whereas it's a tough sell for anything
> else (IM, voice, video, social networking, etc.). I still don't quite
> understand why...
> 
> 
> I think email was different for three reasons:
> 
> 1) Email came about mostly before the Internet took off - indeed, there's an 
> argument that the Internet expansion was driven by email, not the other way 
> around. This placed restrictions on how email could grow.
> 
> 2) SMTP was chosen as the lowest common denominator; it's a gatewaying 
> protocol at heart (as made obvious when you look at early design MTAs like 
> sendmail). XMPP, however, has end-to-end properties, so it's harder to use 
> for gatewaying to non-XMPP networks together. (Though people seem to manage 
> fine)
> 
> 3) The way advertising now operates (and it may very well change) relies on 
> having as much personal and behavioural information on the subjects as 
> possible - there's no incentive for networks to federate if they're 
> consumer-grade and large enough, it's better for their advertising to be a 
> walled garden.

Twitter seems to have a lot of experience here. ON the Stockholm Internet Forum 
the other day someone from Twitter talked about their spam filters. Maybe they 
can join the discussion.

/O

Reply via email to