[neiljohnson]

There are multiple companies building on top of Matrix, some quite publicly like New Vector (https://matrix.org/blog/2018/04/26/matrix-and-riot-confirmed...), some choose to do so more privately.

However, the protocol itself is governed by the Matrix.org Foundation acting as a neutral guardian (https://matrix.org/foundation/), so it unclear how the spec itself would become part of the product.

To suggest that Matrix itself is not well suited to chat is to ignore the rapid adoption of the protocol now used by millions of people.

[SamWhited]

It really doesn't have massive adoption; it looks big because we're in a little bubble of people who play with new tech on HN, I suspect, but overall other protocols like XMPP are used by a vast number more companies and daily users.

The matrix foundation has had trouble trying to fundraise to pay developers, it's not a proper non-profit standards foundation, in my opinion. I'd be skeptical of trusting them.

[neiljohnson]

I was replying to your previous comment that Matrix as a protocol is not suited to chat by pointing to the millions of people who use the service as a means to refute the point.

You can see numbers for the public network here (https://matrix.org/faq/#what-is-the-current-project-status), though these figures do not include installations that choose not to federate publicly.

The Matrix.org Foundation is a non-profit UK Community Interest Company. As you might expect, it accepts donations which can be used to fund work on the project. It reports publicly on its financial status in the same was as any other UK CIC is obliged to. This doesn't seem very controversial to me.

In any case, should you wish to donate yourself you can do so here https://www.patreon.com/matrixdotorg

[SamWhited]

Those numbers aren't that big. Also, millions of people use all kinds of crap either way, that doesn't make it good.