They host their own jitsi instance.

> In this way, I will be legally able to loosen the license over time if I so wish. Without CLA's for customers, I couldn't do that.

Or you can make it poprietary, which is the exact reason I would not want to sign a CLA with you, because I want a guarantee that my contribution remains foss.

True.

But again, I don't take contributions from individuals, so I wouldn't ask you to sign one anyway.

This means that if I take it proprietary, I will have ensured I do not steal from any contributors.

You will not have stolen in the same way that Google/FB don't "steal" your data. Instead, the end user is simply forced into the position to give away their IP to you, where you can adjust the licensing per your whims, even to sell it back to them. It's fine to consider your lack of contributors is related to the "no individual" contributors" choice that you have made, but it would be disingenuous to avoid recognition of how your choices probably result more in "no contributors".

Individual end users will not be contributors.

Businesses will be contributors. These businesses have more "power" than me because they'll be bigger than my one-man shop.

I'll do these CLA's to adjust that power balance.

Matrix is working on a P2P version, there have been a few demos but it's currently still very much WIP. See also https://arewep2pyet.com/

It is not a matrix client. I haven't dug too deep into their system, but it looks to me like a centralized server with additional steps (ie. still a single entity owning the server infrastructure)

From what I read in their documentation[1], session's network is built upon an onion routing system where nodes are registered in the OXEN blockchain; you stake 15000 $OXEN to create a node and if you are "well-behaved" you get rewards in that blockchain -- otherwise you lose your stake.

I haven't dug too deep either but it doesn't sound much more centralized than the tor network for example.

[1] https://docs.oxen.io/products-built-on-oxen/session/network-...

Closest thing would be either XMPP or matrix. Whether either of these is good enough for your usecase is up to you.

I would indeed suggest bitwarden. Mostly because I believe that this type of security critical software needs to be open source to be trustworthy.

Encryption in transit is assumed, and rightfully so. That still means that telegram gets full access to the plaintext and as such is able to give that information to anyone, and do with it as they wish.

I suppose there are some people pit there that think "unencrypted" here means everyone can listen in, but certainly not the hackernews crowd.

> Encryption in transit is assumed, and rightfully so.

Heh, we've come far. True unencrypted chat was once popular, and technically still exists (although most IRC networks now default people to TLS.)

Anysoftkeyboard (https://anysoftkeyboard.github.io/) has swype as, though in beta. I currently switch back and forth between ASK and florisboard.

This looks cool! I have been using qalculate (https://qalculate.github.io/) recently, which seems similar. Has anyone used both and can tell me how they compare?

SpeedCrunch is less powerful but I find its interface much easier to understand. SpeedCrunch is really nice. It'd be nice if it was a tad more powerful (for example, to plot quick graphs)

> (And also clients still need the plaintext password at least client-side no matter what we do)

Are matrix devs seriously not aware of what OAuth is and does? That is ... concerning.

Matrix does actually support OAuth (in fact, the mozilla.org matrix server can only be logged in to through OAuth)