Announcement: High Fidelity is not going to host a text chat system


#1

As discussed in todays Alpha meetup, we are going to soon remove the chat system that High Fidelity provides.

There are a number of reasons why we feel this is necessary:

  1. Providing a global chat system is not a core competence of ours and there are a number of fantastic services available on the web.
  2. Domain owners may want different types of chat, or no chat at all and we want them to be able to control that experience.
  3. Our community (you) will be able to provide powerful alternatives for those who are wanting to use chat. With the existing JS stuff we have you could build very powerful solutions, including ranged chat, 1:1 messaging, etc. Creating these different chat experiences should be in the hands of the userbase.
  4. We don’t want to give out usernames of all public users to each other as a default capability.

The question to the community is. What do we need to make available for others to write a chat systems?


A Comparison Between High Fidelity and Sansar
#2

Does this mean Hifi wont be funding any of this? It sounds like you want individuals to take full control of the chat systems.

Does this mean the complete removal of XMPP?

Will we still be able to use GlobalServices to see if a user is online or not?

How soon is this expected to happen? Can it wait for a while until something else is ready? No chat sounds like a scary thought, new users feel isolated enough now.


#3

Without the chat we don’t know who’s online
No built in chat means no friend lists
No built in chat means no method to get to anyone else
etc

Was chatting about this earlier with @Smokey_Bracken and the idea came up what if adding a friend meant you could give them permissions to message you and you could communicate via sms or apple messages.(texts r prettymuch free now)
Smokey was looking for a car and the website lets u call the seller direct but you don’t get their actual phone number…
its a cool thought whilst we need txt chat but want to go next gen
might be interesting


#4

We need API for the OAUTH architecture to begin with. This, of course, assumes the HF architecture documents aren’t hopelessly out of touch with current thoughts and the OAUTH mechanism will continue to exist. Given that we can begin to provide services.

Interface needs its side of it implemented as well. As in;

3rd Party application for application whatever at Domain X would like permission to provide a service to you. By allowing you provide 3rd party application the following information - your agent’s unique identification value and a display name. In return 3rd party system provides the following services… Allow or Disallow?

Beyond that an agent must be given an ability to manage its authorizations in case they wish to later revoke.

This is just the beginning of a list of things needed for arbitrary 3rd parties to replace chat.


#5

I think we at least need a IM system. Often you talk to multiple persons at the same time which is only possible with text. Second, whatever the “Welcome Area” for new users is, it also needs a text chat. When someone new has a problem with his sound and can’t hear/speak he won’t be able to communicate without chat. Chat on the other side is always working.
And before we implement something what could create a big privacy issues we should implement a permission system like @OmegaHeron said.


#6

From this announcement I would assume that a chat system is not central to what hifi is to be. From that I assume that being an interactive virtual world is not central to the plans for hifi. I base these assumptions on the idea that if something is central to your system you build it and control it. Valid assumptions?


#7

Building on this, I feel very strongly that while the decision to focus on voice at the expense of chat in terms of current focus of devt probably makes sense (you have to make choices), we should not be removing existing functionality - there are many people who cannot use voice (just look at our weekly meet ups - are we to be seen and not heard in future?)
Additionally, I do think that we should recognise that text chat is not without possibilities for the future - we should be thinking about pushing the boundaries of what is possible and our “brief” to whoever takes up the baton on this one should be to imagine possibilities and then some in terms of what and how text chat could enhance the user experience rather than seeing it as something residual to be passed over


#8

Looking ahead to High Fidelity serving content for augmented reality …

Multiple “chat” systems will be available - phones, Skype, whatever - but in what ways might this be augmented?

Person/avatar to person/avatar chat: discovery and display of chat systems the other person/avatar chooses to make public to you as a stranger or as a friend.

Local text chat to augment local voice, as a shared baseline experience. Including the ability to mute specific people.

Aside: Probably also want to be able to mute people in local voice, for that matter.

Friends and groups: discovery of who’s logged into High Fidelity; provision and use of hifi:// links for teleporting.

Making 3rd party chat systems available in-world: make Web content able to be displayed in-world (e.g., virtual “smartphone”, floating window, avatar toasts, …).

All these also applicable to the virtual reality case.


#9

Hi all,

I want to update everyone on what is about to happen. The current implementation of chat is about to be removed PR: https://github.com/highfidelity/hifi/pull/4370. We have created a “highfidelity” room on freenote.net, you can access it directly via: http://webchat.freenode.net?channels=highfidelity&uio=d4 . This is a popular 3rd party IRC system that you can access in multiple ways.

When you hit ‘’ or tools>chat in Interface, we will show the following popup.


#10

Uhhmmmmm… I think we might be jumping the gun on removing text-chat from the Interface. At least wait until some kind of consensus is reached as to what sort of in-world text chat/ IM system could replace it, say as a third party pluggin.

As for the idea of implementing some sort of metaverse-wide chat-and-IM system, I’d really think it needs to be something decentralized in the same way that Diaspora is. Each domain could have its own text-chat node, for instance, that local-to-that-domain text-chat could go to, but that also allows someone who’s home is that domain to communicate with the rest of the virtual world at large.

No, I do NOT think we should assume that everyone is going to be primarily or even secondarily using voice once HiFi gets opened to the public… or for that matter that they’ll be doing so within the first couple of years of HiFi being open to the public. We should NOT be pulling the current text-chat system out of Interface until we have some other text-chat thing to replace it with. Period.

I also think the regular meetings are going to be a lot more inconvenient for some to participate in simply because so much of it IS done in text, if only to be able to paste links relevant to the voice conversation, but also because some people, like me, just don’t WANT to talk in voice, even tho the mic is there and works. But also because its often useful to text-chat something real quick rather than talk over the current one speaking or to have to wait till the one speaking finishes speaking.

I have a sneaking suspicion the text-chat will have to go back IN to the Interface before very long, because the lack of text-chat is going to have far more negative impact on how things are conducted than you expect.


#11

I just reinstalled my old chat script
http://www.onemarq.net/pnplus/download/download.html
is how i chatted like 10 years ago XD


#12

Pulling the chat system out of interface is bad system. voice is never a good communication system. I not use it much, ther language problems. Besides voice dont work always, there difference in quality and volume. sometimes. and waring always headphones is pretty annoying to. SOme people cannot voice at all or dont want it. Its especially a problem with roleplaying. and meetings can be problem too.

But now High Fidelity moved to some outside chat system there’s a new problem.
Because chat is heavy used and only get moe used because voice keeps so/so to work with. So when your in the IRC channel that sadly is im afraid right now complete public for everybody you get pulled away from inworld, so when i need to chekc chat i dont know what chris is doing. with the old system i could follow chat with one eye and still see what happens inworld. Thats what i understand now gone.

Other problem, its not easy to communicate now with people in text that arte on other domain.

Again other problem with voice. you cannot read it back. so if your short in webbrowser to check soemthing its possible that you dont hear voice anymore. With tgext you can read it back.

High Fidelity always need to have at least some default chat system. But that have also a problem side to. Because people keep using it still when there are better chat systems available.

But its to early to pull the attention complete out of high fidelity. High fidelity dont like chat. Well believe me get used to it because voice is not the solution in many cases.

No chat system is for sure a stopper for many people.


#13

You can do what ever you want with chat. e.g. With one line of code:

var webviewer = new WebWindow(‘chat’, “http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=highfidelity&uio=d4”, 100, 100); webviewer.setVisible(true);

I can bring up an IRC chat channel in Interface. You could even tie that to your own personal key combo. Does that not seem like a much more powerful way to handle something like this?


#14

In Interface Mac v. 1902 the console is always on top of every window in my machine, can we change this?


#15

I’m the one person who likes this?

I kinda expected this, because I always found the global text chat odd, especially when envisioning HiFi as a 3D internet used by millions. I also am kinda critical towards the notion of a text chat in a virtual world with voice. I dislike how voice is ‘off’ in most places in SL, largely because of the text chat.

I kinda dislike a lot of things in SL, and feel that it was a massive, failed experiment. The lack of social features is kinda the point. The World Wide Web doesn’t have Facebook and IRC functions built in, those are just other applications that run on the Internet, often as websites themselves.
SL could never have hoped to ‘replace’ the Internet, as it had ‘friction’ caused by requiring an account with a password and logging in. HiFi has that currently, but it may be an optional thing, as it seems you already can access the Metaverse as a ‘guest’.

No need to login means less friction, means more people finding the world.

Less social functions also means a simpler UI, which is less ‘scary’ to the average user. HiFi are gunning for the mainstream here.

(Edit: SL is ‘failed experiment’ if you assume success = mainstream 3D internet, and not ‘popular MMO’)


#16

That’s good news chris. except the console window stays always in top with the latest build i used in the meeting i think 2023 ? That need a small fix.

But expect a weird meeting next time because chat is … somewhere.:slight_smile:


#17

I rather like the idea of deep integration with diaspora. You can then run a pod alongside your world server.

Both projects have a specific focus on decentralisation.


#18

Well, as for what @NETVERK said about the oddity of a global text chat, which is to say, one that everyone in the entire HiFi world would see what you typed, I had pretty much figured that was a temporary stop-gap until they could eventually develop a more local-based text chat, that is, one where only those on the same domain could see it, or only those within x number of meters from you, come to that. I still say that’s the way it should go.

Yes, I agree with others here in stating that voice-only chat is not really going to catch on as widely and universally as the HiFi brass seem to think. It is far more likely that there will always be a high percentage of those who prefer text-only chat, and a good chance it will be the majority of them, probably for years to come. And that it could well take decades before it completely goes away, if ever.

Too often the engineer types think “Everyone will likely go THAT way” in relation to accepting a new tech’s features, and then get taken completely by surprise when way, WAY more of them than they expected instead go off in an entirely different direction with it, because those engineer types are so enamored with their bright ideas that they think that, by definition, everyone else in the whole wide world will think the same way too.

It’s like when the developers at LL gave us mesh, and expected everyone to mainly get enamored with mesh buildings and objects, and of course quite a lot of people did, and then they added support for rigged, mesh clothing as a sort of afterthought… and then were taken completely by surprise when mesh clothing became far, FAR more everyone’s focus and quite a lot of people complained about all the limitations on what mesh clothes and mesh avs could DO.


#19

Irc for dummies
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10483952/chatroom.js The chat room script for basic irc functionality
http://www.onemarq.net/pnplus/download/download.html pnp+ chat script for that 1991 old school cool


#20

Yuck, IRC is awful… its like going back 30 years… Select a suitable XMPP/Jabber service as a default suggestion please.

It is a problem in SL that the text chat is not linked to some externally accessible mechanism that allows for “rooms”, chat spaces, groups and everything that must come for all this to work at global scale.

The region/server needs to be able to provide the chat solution rather than it be viewer dependent I would think. But some “systems” wide or global means to talk to others, join group chat etc is needed and sometime that needs to be beyond the viewer itself too.