I wonder how latency impacts the "live chatting" experience.
Email protocols have specific impediments on egress and ingress: on one end to ensure that a sender isn't sending out spam (challenges, proof of work, etc), and on the other end to ensure the recipient isn't getting spam/malware/etc.
Add to that SPF, DKIM, DMARC processing along the way...
It's not uncommon to have conversations with a 3rd party along the lines of...
- Did you get my email? I just sent it a minute ago.
- No not yet. It'll come through.
...with this taking sometimes up to a minute.
We accept a certain latency with email communications, but I'm unsure that will offer a good user experience for interactive chat.
With my conversations, it is often a minute to get users to respond if they are working on multiple IM conversations and need to finish their thought, or are otherwise doing something meaningful outside of cyberspace anyways, so the delivery time is of less importance.
Boundless speculation: whatever the difference in instant delivery of a message and the human user noting/changing gears to address it and delivery taking (in your worse case example) 1 minute, just in time for the human user to be 'ready' to receive another message is too small to be meaningful for non-techie users.
Anecdata for those users in my contacts list that are techies: after about 5 IMs, further chatting seems to organically migrate to a phone call or desktop client session (Slack/Volt/Skype/Discord) rather than the approx 3 messages every 5 minutes my cursory glance at message times in Signal shows for the non-techie users.
Eg. Also do a dns txt lookup for "chat" which can have a specialised server that the recipient is in control of (or subscribes to). It could bypass the legacy issues of email, but still provide a fallback in case the recipient uses email only.
Would this leak the ip addy of the sender to the receiver and people along the wires?
Each time I looked into webrtc and websockets I think, I noticed the need for a stun/turn server in order to mask sender ip addys, but don't know enough about all that atm.
I think making the ux similar to what people are familiar with / similar to the most popular options (maybe like twitter and wechat too) -
we'd get a chance of getting people away from the walled gardens -
I'd love for new apps to not only provide that kind of ux, but also give options to send comments (and also recieve in the client and display) via other platforms like signal, matrix, activity pub, all the bridges..
It would need icons next to messages to show which portal they are coming from / going to, is it encrypted, etc.
I for one would very much like to see new viewing options for some shitty email clients.
I appreciate the home page of this delta chat is showing screen views for desktop, android, iPhone - wish all products did this.
Sister comment says Gmail allows 500 messages to be sent per day. 500 messages/day sent in napkin math = ~20 messages/hour. Per https://www.textrequest.com/blog/how-many-texts-people-send-... , American adults sent 128 or less texts per day in 2018. You can send triple that number & still not hit the Gmail limit.
For other email providers, the limit is even higher. I checked for Fastmail's equivalent daily message limits, and it enables 4,000 or more per day.
For me personally, if I'm going to be doing over ~ 50 sent messages in one day, I'm going to ditch the mobile device and move to a desktop as I prefer a full-size Model M keyboard to touchscreens wherever possible. Most of my awake time is at work or home, where desktops abound.
I don't want to speak for you or others' preferences on this, as admittedly I don't text nearly as much as most of my peers, but I suspect others also at some point reach for a desktop UI, whether native (Signal), electron (Slack), or web-based (FB Messenger / WhatsApp / pick yer poison) for in-depth, non-mobile conversations.
This is still a conceptually cool idea for many reasons, but for this and other practical reasons it may end up being preferable to use it with another email provider. Especially since I personally think JMAP is intriguing and this might be useful for Delta Chat.
I do worry that without good support for Google accounts and maybe even some other major free email providers (important: I really don't know,) Delta chat may face practical issues with gaining critical mass.
(Just for full disclosure and good practice, I am an employee at Google, but I do not work on Gmail and I'm speaking strictly as a user.)
I don't really expect Gmail to bend over backwards to accommodate this. Like you though, I worry that this could inhibit Delta.chat getting enough critical mass.
On the other hand, if delta.chat starts to collect some critical mass, Gmail would probably want to avoid the generation of a pro-tip like "don't use Gmail, they're too restrictive, use Fastmail/iCloud/Outlook instead" because that could cost market share...or they can increase that limit a bit and keep the status quo going well.
Full disclosure -> I am not a Google employee, but thank you for providing the caveat for your comment! Those tend to help comments be read in a more meaningful light, speaking for myself at least :D
I mean, if you have a chat with 100 participants, you're limited to sending 5 messages that day, but having such big chat rooms is not really that common, is it? And if you really have that need you can get cheap account at e.g. Fastmail and increase that to 4,000 or 8,000 recipients per day.
Also, the Autocrypt Level 1 spec, which this seems to implement, appears to be based on PGP, with the following caveat: "Sometimes Autocrypt recommends to send cleartext mail even though encryption appears technically possible."
> "Arkani-Hamed now sees the ultimate goal of physics as figuring out the mathematical question from which all the answers flow."
There's no reason to run two email clients on my phone to receive the same messages.
I can't tell from their website if 2 people who use a Gmail account + Delta Chat reveal the content of their email to Google.
I'm not sure what that's trying to say but the grammar is definitely wrong.
"Thanks to Delta Chat Core, as a client developer you do not even need to deal with IMAP directly."