This is excellent work by threatspike and we should commend/support efforts like this that help keep us informed of the sneaky and intrusive actions of certain pieces of software
Zoom still don't understand GDPR
211–220 of 267 posts
Re: Zoom still don't understand GDPR
#212It's unfortunate that they bought and destroyed Keybase [1] in a bid to improve their security and even still there seems to be no improvement. Guess even the best folks can't make an impact if company culture prevents it. [1] https://github.com/keybase/client/graphs/commit-activity
Ahhhh, "Our incredible journey" aka "So long suckers! See you at the yacht club sometime!"
- The code is open source
- It provides all features for free
- It is actually usable
- AFAICT, no reports of security breaches
- No privacy violations
- At one point, they actually GAVE free lumens to its users. No strings attached at all. I received ~40USD worth of XLM which I transferred to an exchange and sold it right away.
Please explain to me. again: how did they make you a sucker of you or their users?
Re: Zoom still don't understand GDPR
#213Why people still uses zoom? Something like Google Meet or Microsoft Teams are better.
Because it's frictionless. It's very easy to set up a Zoom meeting with anyone in the world. When I tried MS Teams, my impression was that it required a fair amount of advance configuration. This is no problem if you're meeting the same people repeatedly and they work for the same employer as you. Indeed, as the name of the software suggests, it's good for "teams". But for me, anyway, this hasn't been my typical use…
Zoom seems pretty high-friction vs jit.si . It forces (kinda, tricks I suppose) install of a client exe for example and IIRC requires registration.
Jitsi you just follow the link, webrtc means no download.
Re: Zoom still don't understand GDPR
#214It's unfortunate that they bought and destroyed Keybase [1] in a bid to improve their security and even still there seems to be no improvement. Guess even the best folks can't make an impact if company culture prevents it. [1] https://github.com/keybase/client/graphs/commit-activity
The Problem of that they don't want to be secure in the sense you used.
They made it pretty clear that security is for them not a fundamental aspect of their service but an afterthought they have to follow because they would use customers elsewise.
I.e. security is still one of the lowest prioritise for them and only a priority art all because of public pressure
Re: Zoom still don't understand GDPR
#215Earlier quoted context omitted.
Usually this happens because the person who wrote the file or daemon didn't write the uninstaller and no one gives a hoot about it at review. Never assume malice that which can be explained by a poor engineering culture
Always assume that the malicious outcome is the intended outcome. Somewhere at zoom a tech lead looked at the features planned, saw 'uninstaller' and deprioritized it to P4. That was the malice, even though they did not cacke and wore a top hat with a monocle while doing it.
I’ve never worked somewhere where the tech lead would make that call; product would make the call after the team or tech lead gave estimates on different trade offs.
Re: Zoom still don't understand GDPR
#216Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why not, if that’s where a majority of the teams making engineering decisions are?
That's not fair. You should look where their vision, policy , and standards are set. Engineering decisions respect those principals.
> Engineering decisions respect those principals.
Do they?
How well does management verify that they do?
Re: Zoom still don't understand GDPR
#217Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't get your argument about the pricing. If you're 5+ people you can split that cost. If it's for professional use, a few dollars is a blip.
We’re 2 in our startup. - Fastmail costs $50 per person per year, - Gapps would be $60, - Whereby asks for $90 per user. It’s just a feeling that this is wrong for what they contribute, but you’re right, if we share one account for a team, that would be a lower cost. Maybe I was “anchored” by their previous pricing $4, which I thought I’d subscribe as soon as I’d have income, even though I didn’t need the paid featur…
> Whereby asks for $90 per user.
Whereby costs $90 per Organisation for Meetings up to 12 users. We have a url for each team without a password and it works for us. Yes, 1 person manages those meeting rooms.
Add $10/month to extend to 50users.
Whereby was the best I could find to share screen of Fedora, still limited as sharing only works under Firefox not their Chrome based app or any other variant of Chrome I could get my hands on. Zoom, jutsi and others couldn’t properly share screens nor application Windows.
Re: Zoom still don't understand GDPR
#218Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ahhhh, "Our incredible journey" aka "So long suckers! See you at the yacht club sometime!"
- The code is open source - It provides all features for free - It is actually usable - AFAICT, no reports of security breaches - No privacy violations - At one point, they actually GAVE free lumens to its users. No strings attached at all. I received ~40USD worth of XLM which I transferred to an exchange and sold it right away. Please explain to me. again: how did they make you a sucker of you or their users?
Is server side open source?
Re: Zoom still don't understand GDPR
#219Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Yeah this was so sad, but I'm happy the guys that made it got paid. I don't really sympathize with this. You build something, get a ton of people to use it, advocate for it, get their friends to use it... I think after that, you have a responsibility to those users, and selling to a company like Zoom and then peaceing out on further work does not fulfill that responsibility.
I couldn't disagree more. Most users didn't even pay, for goodness' sake.
Was there a choice to pay??
Re: Zoom still don't understand GDPR
#220Why people still uses zoom? Something like Google Meet or Microsoft Teams are better.