alt Hacker News> Nothing wrong with it but it feels wrong calling matrix out on that.
The difference is that Libera relies on blocking anonymous connections abusive IP ranges (proxies, gratis VPN providers). When abusers connect through Matrix, Libera only had their username, which delayed spam mitigation.
> The bridge should have a provision to prevent users to see any backlog from before the moment they joined.
That's already how it's supposed to work, though it had some issues.
> Ps I really hate those new "single puppet" third party bridges they recommend. Because they break nick colouring and also the actual nick of the user speaking is in a different place.
I think everyone hates them (and I say this as someone who maintains a few of them). Some IRC clients have scripts to substitute nicks from relayed messages though.
> The difference is that Libera relies on blocking anonymous connections abusive IP ranges (proxies, gratis VPN providers). When abusers connect through Matrix, Libera only had their username, which delayed spam mitigation.
Yeah but that's not Matrix' fault. They just offer the same ability as Libera: To create an account with no validation.
Putting pressure on Matrix server providers to stop anonymous connections when they themselves provide anonymous connections is a bit too hypocritical to me. If they have a problem with the practice then just block matrix connections (as they have done). But don't complain about the practice.
Personally I love the idea of anonymous connections like on IRC and also some Matrix servers. I'm a bit sick of every single service needing me to make an 'account' these days and needing all kinds of personal info from me.