11–20 of 105 posts
What’s the point of implementing this as a telegram bot rather than a website? I guess it’s a USP, considering there are hundreds of disposable email websites out there, but I don’t see how it enhances the user experience.
What’s the point of implementing this as a telegram bot rather than a website? I guess it’s a USP, considering there are hundreds of disposable email websites out there, but I don’t see how it enhances the user experience.
Telegram is such an underappreciated platform. It has many features other platforms lack, is reasonably privacy-friendly, more so than fb/whatsapp/etc, but not enough to sacrifice features or UX. The have an API ind both official and unofficial clients for almost all platforms, including command line and native, non-electron Windows (UWP). The client API is not easy to use, as crypto and similar features are involved…
Welp, there is a lot of discussion around these claims.
But we are also on Telegram, mostly because I'm using their API for our Home-Assistant instance to deliver status updates (left the bathroom window open for too long, weather-forecast on the morning and evening for the next 3 days). I like it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Privacy-wise Whatsapp is probably better due to E2E.
AFAIK, WhatsApp has decent E2EE, but metadata is not encrypted. So even though Facebook can't see what you are saying, it can see to whom you are saying it, how often, at what times etc.
No reply yet.
Telegram is such an underappreciated platform. It has many features other platforms lack, is reasonably privacy-friendly, more so than fb/whatsapp/etc, but not enough to sacrifice features or UX. The have an API ind both official and unofficial clients for almost all platforms, including command line and native, non-electron Windows (UWP). The client API is not easy to use, as crypto and similar features are involved…
> It has many features other platforms lack, is reasonably privacy-friendly
Telegram is such an underappreciated platform. It has many features other platforms lack, is reasonably privacy-friendly, more so than fb/whatsapp/etc, but not enough to sacrifice features or UX. The have an API ind both official and unofficial clients for almost all platforms, including command line and native, non-electron Windows (UWP). The client API is not easy to use, as crypto and similar features are involved…
> It has many features other platforms lack, is reasonably privacy-friendly Telegram still has no E2E encryption by default and their official desktop client dont have it either. So it's worth nothing if no one use it. It's not that I have much trust into proprietary fb code, but there are certainly better apps privacy-wise out there.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
AFAIK, WhatsApp has decent E2EE, but metadata is not encrypted. So even though Facebook can't see what you are saying, it can see to whom you are saying it, how often, at what times etc.
Telegram isn’t encrypted at all by default, and its encryption scheme is sketchy.
What’s the point of implementing this as a telegram bot rather than a website? I guess it’s a USP, considering there are hundreds of disposable email websites out there, but I don’t see how it enhances the user experience.
In my case it's convenience. I have Telegram open most of the day and occasionally I use bots for small tasks that could be done elsewhere, but bots offer a more streamlined experience.
web: open browser -> find website in bookmarks -> copy email -> do whatever you need to do with it -> switch back to the website to check for emails
bot: open telegram -> find bot in chat history -> tell it to generate a new address -> copy it -> do whatever you need to do with it -> switch back to the app to check for emails
The only case I could think of a bot being useful is for semi-permanent email. ie. using the same email address for weeks/months, rather than one time only.
Telegram is such an underappreciated platform. It has many features other platforms lack, is reasonably privacy-friendly, more so than fb/whatsapp/etc, but not enough to sacrifice features or UX. The have an API ind both official and unofficial clients for almost all platforms, including command line and native, non-electron Windows (UWP). The client API is not easy to use, as crypto and similar features are involved…
> It has many features other platforms lack, is reasonably privacy-friendly Telegram still has no E2E encryption by default and their official desktop client dont have it either. So it's worth nothing if no one use it. It's not that I have much trust into proprietary fb code, but there are certainly better apps privacy-wise out there.
With significantly worse UX.
> still has no E2E encryption by default
This doesn't make it not reasonably secure in my mind. While the TG people will be able to access your messages, they can also process them, making stuff like large groups even possible (imagine the distribution hell otherwise).
I do tend to think that there's not much of a down side to E2E for private chats though, since you can still share private keys between devices to enable sync.
> So it's worth nothing if no one use it.
Telegram is way more than secret chats.