Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Reasons not to use Skype (2012)

stallman.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 180 posts

Re: Reasons not to use Skype (2012)

#81

Post by voltagex_ »

disiplus wrote: post #68
wonko1 wrote: post #13

Another reason not to use Skype is that their support is pretty poor. They've deleted Skype numbers from my account without warning. Someone linked my and my wife's account because we used them on the same PC, and refuse to unlink Skype and Microsoft accounts. I'd love to find an alternative, but given that everybody already has Skype accounts the lock-in is pretty significant. Don't much like the alternatives Stallm…

i was thinking about creating a alternative but hardly anyone is willing to pay for that now. slack probably should be able to create a full replacement for lync, (skype for businnes).

Without an on-premise option you wouldn't be able to get in to most organisations that have Lync deployed. Feature wise it wouldn't be too hard to match, but you might go crazy trying to code Outlook/Exchange integrations.

Re: Reasons not to use Skype (2012)

#83

Post by loup-vaillant »

mrleiter wrote: post #7

The problem with his first argument is that it is a logical fallacy (affirming a disjunct). Just because one does not say A, does not mean that it automatically must be B. He says "most likely", but even this is not certain. I agree, it feels that it must be true. But then again this is an inductive fallacy. Simply because most companies we know that have acted in such a way actually were eavesdropping on its custome…

He said "almost certainly".

If Skype could not eavesdrop on calls, they would most certainly say so when ask —because not saying so would make them look bad. It's then a simple matter of probability theory to deduce that their silence most probably means it can eavesdrop on calls.

Affirming a disjunct is perfectly legitimate approximation in this case.

Re: Reasons not to use Skype (2012)

#84

Post by akoster »

dandandan wrote: post #17
wonko1 wrote: post #13

Another reason not to use Skype is that their support is pretty poor. They've deleted Skype numbers from my account without warning. Someone linked my and my wife's account because we used them on the same PC, and refuse to unlink Skype and Microsoft accounts. I'd love to find an alternative, but given that everybody already has Skype accounts the lock-in is pretty significant. Don't much like the alternatives Stallm…

Stallman won't like it but Facebook Messenger has voice calling built in now and it works very well. I was calling someone in SE Asia from rural Massachusetts recently and the quality was great with very low latency. It felt like a natural conversation given the connectivity challenges on both ends.

I too have been quite pleased with Facebook calling over a 3G connection from the Middle East to North America, though I still find that FaceTime voice calls sound better (pending both parties own apple devices)

Re: Reasons not to use Skype (2012)

#85

Post by homakov »

heinrich5991 wrote: post #33
lightedman wrote: post #19

Reason to use skype: So your dead account doesn't get immediately compromised and you screw your friends over in the process as your account starts sending out malware-infested links. glares at the seven or so users in his blocked list, users that jumped ship to Telegram and left their Skype accounts open to exploitation

Using a strong and unique password would be a good step in not getting compromised.

Not for skype, i've seen spammy messages from tons of contacts, pretty sure it's yet another hole in skype they can't patch https://hub.zhovner.com/geek/how-skype-fixes-security-vulner...

Re: Reasons not to use Skype (2012)

#86

Post by Radle »

"Skype requires the use of a client program that is not free software; in other words, the users don't control it — it controls them.

A nonfree program denies users freedom, which is unjust in itself. Making the ethical issue sharper, for you to use Skype is to encourage someone else to use Skype, which means you're pressuring someone else to surrender freedom as well. This is plenty of reason to refuse to use Skype, but there are more reasons."

How it pains to read such texts. "Everything that's not open source is evil."

Re: Reasons not to use Skype (2012)

#87

Post by sschueller »

ycmbntrthrwaway wrote: post #22

Is there any usable alternative for voice calls? Ring and Tox had problems setting up connection from android to debian linux last time I tried both of them. I really want to replace Skype with something so I can stop using Google Play. Signal is not an option as it is only available via Google Play too. [0] https://ring.cx/ [1] https://tox.chat/

How about wire? https://wire.com

Re: Reasons not to use Skype (2012)

#88

Post by simooooo »

mankash666 wrote: post #3

Stallman claims Skype isn't encrypted end-to-end and then suggests using "free" alternatives that are not in the least bit security concious or end-to-end encrypted.

Also plenty of proprietary firmware being used on the telecom hardware used to transmit the call

Re: Reasons not to use Skype (2012)

#89

Post by lorenzhs »

Radle wrote: post #86

"Skype requires the use of a client program that is not free software; in other words, the users don't control it — it controls them. A nonfree program denies users freedom, which is unjust in itself. Making the ethical issue sharper, for you to use Skype is to encourage someone else to use Skype, which means you're pressuring someone else to surrender freedom as well. This is plenty of reason to refuse to use Skype,…

Your use of "open source" in summarising RMS' opinion is rather unfortunate and leads me to think that you don't know his positions very well.

Re: Reasons not to use Skype (2012)

#90

Post by collyw »

briandear wrote: post #49
jen729w wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I don't disagree that he sounds, in general, like a bit of a douche, you can hardly say that this rider makes him an asshole. He lays out, reasonably, the conditions under which he will speak. He asks for tea, and Pepsi, not Coke. Seems utterly reasonable to me.

So if Coca Cola is the only thing available, he will just refuse. I personally prefer Coke, but I'm not going to walk off stage if I am offered Pepsi. A bit rock-starish if you ask me.

Plenty of vegetarians would refuse meat on moral grounds, why not this?
Post reply on HN