a neural network learns from your and your -- typo
Voice Calls: Secure, Crystal-Clear, AI-Powered
281–290 of 299 posts
Re: Voice Calls: Secure, Crystal-Clear, AI-Powered
#282Earlier quoted context omitted.
Draytek are a good choice at the consumer level.
Having used Drayteks, and supported them, and indeed having owned one (company supplied for site-to-site VPN) I wouldn't recommend them. The feature set is great, the router is not.
Fair enough. This is the problem with consumer gear, it's all so variable. For me, Draytek have been the only vaguely consistent vendor over the years. I've had countless issues with T-link, Asus and Netgear routers.
Re: Voice Calls: Secure, Crystal-Clear, AI-Powered
#283I've managed to setup Telegram for most of my (non-technical) family - wife, siblings, mother (she doesn't even have a smart phone and just uses Telegram as a message client on her desktop. It's a very convenient way to share family related pictures). Voice calls are an excellent addition. If these could now also be extended to video calls, I could likely ditch Skype forever.
Make them switch yet again to Signal? ;)
Most of my family is on iPhone's, while I'm using Android. I tried using Wire as a substitute for Facetime (my 3 year old doesn't consider it a real phone call unless there's video), but it was way too buggy and people would just get annoyed.
Signal's new video chat, however, has worked really well after it got out of beta. There aren't many apps that manage to do video calls well between Android and iPhone, I'm a bit surprised that that feature hasn't gotten more attention.
Re: Voice Calls: Secure, Crystal-Clear, AI-Powered
#284I've managed to setup Telegram for most of my (non-technical) family - wife, siblings, mother (she doesn't even have a smart phone and just uses Telegram as a message client on her desktop. It's a very convenient way to share family related pictures). Voice calls are an excellent addition. If these could now also be extended to video calls, I could likely ditch Skype forever.
I could ditch Skype once i get video and screen sharing.
Wire does video calls and screen sharing.
Re: Voice Calls: Secure, Crystal-Clear, AI-Powered
#285Earlier quoted context omitted.
Read up the comments on the telegram announcement post here on HN. From couple of years back, IIRC. PS: on mobile. Could not.search.
Found it [1]. tldr: First message from TelegramApp has some marketing copy ("acm winner phds") but not horrible. The TelegramApp user remains calm/careful and mostly polite in every message after that. There are only a few cases of sideways slapping and they come from HN users. Despite this the conversation between TelegramApp and HN users remain informative debate and discussion. 1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item…
https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=paveldurov
By the way, it is also worth noting that Nikolai Durov, designer of MTProto, is completely absent from any public discussions of that protocol. Doesn't like talking to the plebs, I suppose.
Re: Voice Calls: Secure, Crystal-Clear, AI-Powered
#286Very good. Great even. But there is a problem. Whatsapp has already won the chat/calls app war. Watch it grow massivly in the next year, i promise. Mostly due to incompetence of MS and Google.
Line is so dominant in Japan,Taiwan,Thailand, and HongKong and kept themselves independent and hugely profitable. Kakao Talk in Korea. WeChat in China. Even in the US its going to be all SnapChat soon. Whatsapp is way way behind in features it is prime for disruption. Why would Whatsapp have huge growth waiting for it? What's their particular plan?
The sex industry uses WhatsApp primarily. This is what decided things.
Re: Voice Calls: Secure, Crystal-Clear, AI-Powered
#287Earlier quoted context omitted.
An FAQ isn't binding. What does their TOS say?
Are you really serious? This is a post snowden society. > An FAQ isn't binding. Probably not, but please beware that this service is not subject to US law, but the laws of the Russian Federation. > What does their TOS say? TOS are subject to change, right? And even if it wasn't, do you really think the TOS will stop a company run by a russian nationalist[1] offering a free service with a million dollar bill will stic…
> service is not subject to US law, but the laws of the Russian Federation
They are not registered in Russia, afaik.
> russian nationalist[1] … [1] https://www.instagram.com/p/-MrPWGr7aL/
That's just Pavel's usual populism. He says the same things about Russia or pretty much anything.
Re: Voice Calls: Secure, Crystal-Clear, AI-Powered
#288Earlier quoted context omitted.
>I always see these services talking about "crystal clear quality", but never latency, which is a shame. Maybe there is simply nothing they can do about it. I've noticed latency get worse and worse on the Internet since I started using it in the 90s and nobody seems to talk about it. Well, the first problem at home is likely your wireless. Live in an apartment and you can pick up 30 other routers in your wifi search.…
I don't know much about the different router brands and models. Which would you consider to be some of the good ones?
Chiming in here with more anecdotal evidence - I always look in the Tomato (http://www.polarcloud.com/tomatofaq#what_will_this_run_on, http://tomato.groov.pl/?page_id=69) and DD-WRT (http://www.dd-wrt.com/site/support/router-database) "supported router" sections. Personally I like the Netgear routers which have semi-official support here: https://www.myopenrouter.com/
Re: Voice Calls: Secure, Crystal-Clear, AI-Powered
#289Earlier quoted context omitted.
Read up the comments on the telegram announcement post here on HN. From couple of years back, IIRC. PS: on mobile. Could not.search.
Found it [1]. tldr: First message from TelegramApp has some marketing copy ("acm winner phds") but not horrible. The TelegramApp user remains calm/careful and mostly polite in every message after that. There are only a few cases of sideways slapping and they come from HN users. Despite this the conversation between TelegramApp and HN users remain informative debate and discussion. 1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item…
Being cordial and polite on Hacker News wasn't my concern. My concern is their repeated dismissal of feedback from experienced cryptographers.
Cryptographers can't seem to make sense of a lot of their design decisions in the MTProto protocol. Their response to criticism has mostly been in the form of: if you can't demonstrate a break directly, then we don't care.
Given how fragile cryptography can be, this is an absurdly irresponsible way to maintain a cryptosystem. Modern cryptographic designs try to be very principled, and steps are taken to prevent any kind of theoretical weakness, even if we don't know how to break it in practice. This is because cryptographic breaks only ever get stronger — never weaker.
As an example, TLS 1.0 using doing authentication for CBC modes with MAC-then-Encrypt was known to be weak, but it was only years later when researchers were able to turn this into a plaintext-leaking break. And MTProto is absolutely littered with unconventional or known-weak constructs, giving a lot of potential levers attackers can use to break it.
You might argue that it's fine for this to be the case, as long as they respond quickly to protocol breaks. The problem is, the good guys only learned how to break TLS 1.0 CBC when the attack was published. Did the NSA/CIA/GRU/FSB know about these attacks before we did? There's no way to know. But if it had conservatively chosen an Encrypt-then-MAC scheme to begin with, such an attack would have never been possible in the first place.
That's not to throw the TLS 1.0 authors under the bus here. The weaknesses of that type of scheme were yet to be widely known. In the case of MTProto, weaknesses in their use of certain constructs are widely known, and they don't seem o care.
Re: Voice Calls: Secure, Crystal-Clear, AI-Powered
#290I still vote Wire. It used to be buggy, but much better now, plus completely Open Source (Telegram is not). I just placed my first Wire audio call from my phone a few minutes ago: great quality (better than my actual phone service), no noticeable lag.
> It used to be buggy How long ago are you referring to? I tried to use it around the end of 2016 to chat with friends and it was nearly impossible to use. We would try to add a contact but the other person would not appear online, despite having the app open in front of us. Messages would frequently not be delivered, or take exceedingly long times to be delivered (hours). Notifications of a new message were also qui…
Not sure, 6-9 months ago. Texting always worked for me, but audio & video were hit-&-miss.
Actually, thinking about it now, I haven't used video much lately, but audio has been much better the past 1-2 months.