[Standards] [Members] 33C3 talk on Signal and current XMPP issue in providing a similar UX
xramtsov at gmail.com
Tue Jan 3 09:55:42 UTC 2017
Tue, 3 Jan 2017 09:40:43 +0000
Dave Cridland <dave at cridland.net> wrote:
> Although one really need not use Bayesian classifiers (etc) merely
> with words; any indicators can be used as grist for the classifier's
> mill - such as subscription state, if there has been an outgoing
> message to the sender before, if the sender and recipient are within
> the same MUC anywhere, what unicode blocks are in use in the message,
> and so on.
> I agree there's disadvantages in SPIM versus SPAM, but there are also
> advantages in as much as the server knows a huge amount more about the
> overall states of the recipient jid than an email server can possibly
> know about its mailboxes.
I agree with you. I just replied to the question "why can't we borrow
> OK, for a concrete suggestion:
> Suspected SPIM gets sent into a multi-item, well-known, PEP node.
> Clients MAY subscribe to this, or MAY periodically poll this.
Fine by me. However, clients need to know the pep node, so probably some
XEP is required.
More information about the Standards