In times like these it is easy to ask:

[elizafox@social.treehouse.systems]

In times like these it is easy to ask:

"WHY NOT MAKE A NEW CHAT PROTOCOL"

1) Existing chat protocols largely solve the problem to various degrees. Nobody does it *satisfactorily* in a way that satisfies everyone, but they nonetheless solve the core issue.

2) Making a chat protocol is hard; making one with E2EE that works reliably and doesn't rely on a central server is extremely hard. You need a cryptographer to audit it. Making one that supports E2EE correctly *and* encrypts metadata *and* supports federation *and* isn't a bloated hot mess *and* plays well with mobile? Painfully hard. Now make it reliable.

Matrix discovered this fact. Signal is... well, probably one of the better designed ones from a cryptography standpoint (unlike XMPP, it actually encrypts metadata and isn't a Kafkaesque nightmare to implement nor a crusty 90's relic that should have died in 2010), but still does not satisfy everyone.

3) To make a new chat protocol that satisfies everyone, you need *money.* Cryptographers are not free. Developers deserve to get paid, and if you think that they should just pour their blood sweat and tears into it for free, you're clearly not a developer. Guess what? People don't want to pay for chat. Nobody ever in the history of anywhere will pay for chat when they can use Telegram or Discord or IRC or even Matrix (despite being a pile of hot shit) for free. Everyone will go back to Discord next week. They're mad now, but will grumble and do it anyway.

So guess how it gets funded?

If you're lucky you have a patron. Otherwise? Governments and police, who will pay. Selling data, because data brokers want more data. Or... charging money for extras, like Discord does, on top of all the other stuff. Or like IRC, it relies on a brittle network of volunteer servers that pop in and out of existence, and the most durable ones are also the ones run by the biggest assholes you've ever met in your life.