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

Telegram Voice Chats

telegram.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 126 posts

Re: Telegram Voice Chats

#101

Post by mediaman »

elliebike wrote: post #90
nikivi wrote: post #4

I found Durov's plans to monetize Telegram most interesting. https://t.me/durov/142 Team features (competing with Slack/Discord?), ad tools for telegram channels and premium stickers. Whilst keeping all the existing Telegram features.

I joined this, replied to the post, and now I'm being sent lots of creepy messages and dick pics from the men of the internet :/ Telegram has no option for "Only allow contacts to message me", it turns out. After lots of messages, they eventually offer to auto archive and mute people not on your contacts, but it's still fairly visible on the app. Perhaps Telegram should work on better abuse management before adding v…

That's bizarre. I just looked at the app and they support contacts-only limits for everything (voice, presence, profile photo, forwarded messages) _except_ for regular messages.

You can't reject images from non-contacts either. It's either images from everyone or nobody.

Does your chats list get filled up with these unsolicited messages from randos?

It seems like they should at the very least offer a mechanism to accept a contact request before any messages can be sent.

It's also an interesting example in the vastly different experience that different demographics can have in an app - say, women, or minorities often the recipients of abuse - and how blind an app maker can be to that experience if it's not intentionally studied.

Re: Telegram Voice Chats

#103

Post by mediaman »

dotancohen wrote: post #98
elliebike wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I joined this, replied to the post, and now I'm being sent lots of creepy messages and dick pics from the men of the internet :/ Telegram has no option for "Only allow contacts to message me", it turns out. After lots of messages, they eventually offer to auto archive and mute people not on your contacts, but it's still fairly visible on the app. Perhaps Telegram should work on better abuse management before adding v…

Go to `Settings -> Privacy and Security`. For each option (calls / groups / etc) change "Everybody" to "Contacts".

Look again: none of the available options are for restricting incoming messages to contacts (at least on iOS).

Re: Telegram Voice Chats

#104

Post by MattJ100 »

ValentineC wrote: post #81
upofadown wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one will win. That's not how this works. Things will continue to be an ongoing example of XKCD-927 until the world as a whole cares enough to fix things. The train wreck that is instant messaging makes me realize how incredibly lucky we are to have email.

> The train wreck that is instant messaging makes me realize how incredibly lucky we are to have email. Isn't the opposite of xkcd 927 a monopoly? If we're talking about a federated standard, we had XMPP [1], but nobody who can create user-friendly apps seems to want to adopt it. [1] https://xmpp.org/

Snikket[1] is an attempt at creating (maybe better "curating", as we're not starting from scratch) a suite of well-integrated user-friendly XMPP software (a server, and a single app for each platform).

The server is available as a Docker image, though we're still working on things like a web admin. Android app is available, the iOS app is due to enter beta in a month or two.

This is a personal thing for me. This year I migrated my family to XMPP from WhatsApp (at least for communicating with each other), and I want others to be able to do the same. Trying to make it a sustainable project (it's 100% open-source).

[1]: https://snikket.org/

Re: Telegram Voice Chats

#105

Post by berkes »

spicybright wrote: post #82
berkes wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Telegram, the client, is fully FLOSS. You can even find it on f-droid¹, contrary to e.g. Signal, which is only available for installation via closed app stores. Do you refer to the server-stack? How would that being Open Source help you when you cannot ever verify what a server actually runs? ¹ https://f-droid.org/en/packages/org.telegram.messenger/

That's totally false. Here's the client you can download, compile, and side-load yourself: https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android And here's the server implementation you can also run yourself: https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server Telegram has also been exploited multiple times, while signal has held up against a US federal subpoena. https://www.theverge.com/2016/10/4/13161026/signal-subpoena-...

I did not say, nor wanted to imply that Signal is not FLOSS.

Just that Signal is not on F-Droid. Which has a bit of a history and some drama. It was there, log ago. Still textsecure back then.

Sure, you can build it yourself. And from there, with some hoops to jump, install it on your phone over adb (it's what I did). But that is far from fdroid or some other app store. E.g. there are no updates, which is a crucial feature in a security-critical app.

Re: Telegram Voice Chats

#106

Post by ruined »

forgotmypw17 wrote: post #99
tenryuu wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can read the whole thing without an account, it is a public channel and the entire message is displayed on the t.me link. It's a bit jarring on a desktop browser because it looks like the post is cut off, but it's just a really really weird overflow with scrolling

When I reached the page, I only saw a ,,view in telegram,, button.

it loads the page content with js for some reason

Re: Telegram Voice Chats

#107

Post by lucb1e »

curiousgal wrote: post #8

I used to mainly use Telegram but their broken notifications on Android turned me off. If a chat app can't get notifications right, it's not worth using.

It's a mixed bag. Some people (mostly also those who have zero ways of even starting to debug it) seem to have a lot of trouble with it, also on dummy OSes like Apple's, while for me it simply works on a heavily customized Android where a ton of stuff breaks and indeed a lot of other messengers have trouble with it (ranging from Keybase which shows nothing at all ever to Matrix which pops up a notification every 5 seconds for 0.2 seconds "checking for messages" in order to make it work).

It seems not to be a Telegram-specific problem, and I haven't heard from anyone who actually had the issue and even attempted to find what's wrong.

Re: Telegram Voice Chats

#108

Post by lucb1e »

kome wrote: post #38
MatthiasP wrote: post #23

No mention of any kind of encryption?

"Server-client encryption is used in Cloud Chats (private and group chats), Secret Chats use an additional layer of client-client encryption." from: https://telegram.org/faq#q-so-how-do-you-encrypt-data

Big-time Telegram user for usability reasons, but their encryption is a joke. "Server-client encryption" whose server anyway, the NSA's? It might as well be.

Re: Telegram Voice Chats

#109

Post by lucb1e »

IshKebab wrote: post #46

TL;DR: It's like Discord's voice channels, instead of WhatsApp's group voice calls. You can join and leave at any point.

Or like Mumble or like TeamSpeak or like Wire or... this isn't unique to any specific brand, not sure if there is a reason to specifically refer to a walled network service.

Re: Telegram Voice Chats

#110

Post by PurpleFoxy »

eitland wrote: post #97
unicornporn wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's one of, if not the, best UX chat message apps with so many features it's sort of mindblowing. I'd go as far as saying it's by far the best. I have used the word unnerving to describe the fact it's so beyond the rest of the competition, yet free and without a viable business model. I use Signal with friends and Matrix with other nerds.

> yet free and without a viable business model. This has been bothering me as well but seems to be solved now. All current messaging features will be free but new team features etc will be paid IIRC and AFAIK.

It’s mind blowing how the app has had millions of users and massive development for years and it was all paid for by one billionaire’s personal funds without a plan to make the money back. It’s only being monetised now because it costs too much.
Post reply on HN