gsv

joined 3 weeks ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago

Using it for years and am fully satisfied. Basically, any imap client capable of encryption will do.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 days ago

Checked again. Beeper will be running “local bridges”. Once these are implemented into a modular system, there is not really a need for a local chat protocol in my understanding. The matrix connection can simply become another bridge and a Beeper server for Beeper chats would basically be yet another matrix server.

https://blog.beeper.com/2024/06/04/2024-beeper-roadmap/?ref=textscom

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago

The FAQ says that “all integrations were implemented in-house using the Texts Platform SDK”. Whether that sdk is a derivative of the Matrix protocol? No idea. Texts.com does not offer connections to matrix, which kind of suggests it’s not 🤷🏼‍♂️ We will have to see whether the announced unified app will be running a solution based on Matrix or not.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days ago (3 children)

Not exactly what was asked but a thought as I’ve been considering the same. After merging with Texts.com, Beeper seems to be redesigning the bridge architecture. I read that the implementation will move towards running the bridges on the client device so that the decryption is happening in the RAM of the end user’s machine rather than the server. In that case, the mentioned security problem will be at least partially resolved. Self-hosting the bridges is already possible now. One will still have to trust Beeper, though. As I am using their software already, it looks like there’s no reason, yet, to mistrust them.