Telegram still missing message reactions. Kind of surprising at this point with the speed at which they pump out features.
This is the kind of feature that can burn servers :)
Especially at telegram scale
Telegram: Voice Chats 2.0:Channels, Millions of Listeners, Recorded Chats
91–100 of 128 posts
Re: Telegram: Voice Chats 2.0:Channels, Millions of Listeners, Recorded Chats
#92I‘m hoping that messaging apps will add a feature that allows you to transcribe voice messages after you received them. I find it rather annoying to listen to five minutes of audio when I could read a message in less than a minute.
It's will take some effort to use, but actually someone made Telegram bot to do exactly this: @transcriber_bot It's open source, but works through Yandex Translation API: https://github.com/charslab/TranscriberBot
There is also thr voicy bot.
Re: Telegram: Voice Chats 2.0:Channels, Millions of Listeners, Recorded Chats
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you have 2 devices, one device can send messages to the other, all e2e encrypted. It's the same for group chats: if you are part of a chat, any participant can send you the history of the chat. All those issues are protocol-related. E2E only stipulates that the message can't be read between the two ends, it doesn't say you can't send a technical message for making a better UX.
Doesn't even have to send the full history of the chat, it can only send you the encryption key while the history is stored on the server.
Indeed, and you can go even further: with e2ee there is no need for central server beyond dumb distribution of opaque blobs. So the history can be exchanged by the whole network and the encryption keys shared recipient by recipient on a need-to-know basis. That's what bitmessage is doing, for example
Re: Telegram: Voice Chats 2.0:Channels, Millions of Listeners, Recorded Chats
#94I've been using Telegram for a few years now, but I wish they allowed you to use it without phone number.
At least you can hide it.
Re: Telegram: Voice Chats 2.0:Channels, Millions of Listeners, Recorded Chats
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not op, but what would you give him in return? Sending some random purist on the internet my personal texts is one thing. Sending it to the company promising secure communication, company which delivers the best convenience messaging UX in the whole fucking world without any ads... Well, if you can’t see the difference...
Don’t get me wrong, I love complete e2e! I am choosing iMessage with complete e2e every time I can, but iMessage is iOS only and telegram is many years ahead in user convenience even from it. You might as well continue pushing for pgp for secure email. User convenience is not optional.
you conflate iMessage with what is possible with e2ee
Re: Telegram: Voice Chats 2.0:Channels, Millions of Listeners, Recorded Chats
#96Telegram has by far the best desktop experience from all messengers. Smallest memory footprint and snappy UI.
The simplest explanation for this is the fact that the desktop apps are native apps and not based on the massive and sluggish electron framework.
This is so accurate I feel like I can just die now.
Re: Telegram: Voice Chats 2.0:Channels, Millions of Listeners, Recorded Chats
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly. I don't like how CH was only introduced for iOS and follows the same annoying strategy that Gmail used before (invitation).
What's even more annoying is that Clubhouse requires access to the entire contacts list/address book if you as a user would like to invite someone else. You can't invite someone by just entering their phone number (since a phone number is the only way to register for it). It doesn't have to be this way, but the Clubhouse team doesn't seem to care.
I deleted my account the moment I realized this. It's incredible most people don't seem to care.
Re: Telegram: Voice Chats 2.0:Channels, Millions of Listeners, Recorded Chats
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just out of curiosity, what kind of discussion do you have that require e2e? Myself I use TG extensively with friends, family, girlfriend and I think I've used secret chats once when the gf wanted to send a naughty photo. It's not that I don't have anything to hide, it's just I choose what to say according to the environment and I feel the features of telegram far outweigh the con of not having e2e at all times.
There are two kinds of things someone may want to hide: legal stuff and illegal stuff. It's a real shame that governments have succeeded in conflating the two and forcing us to take a position that is not the one we really have. Truly a brilliant move. Of course you have something to hide, it's called privacy. There is absolutely no reason your private life should be public by default, so why accept it ?
I fully understand.
Privacy is important to me, but it's not a binary state.
What I talk about to my friends, girlfriends and family are all on different "privacy levels". If the chats with my friends were disclosed, I'd probably be made a laughing stock at most but it's no big deal. My family ones would probably be most boring, and the ones with my girlfriend could be material for a soap opera, and embarrassing.
But it's not the end of the world if someone at Telegram can read them of if they were disclosed by some hacker group.
My point is that it is an amazing chat app and have way too many benefits for me to not use it, but I _am_ fully aware that there are a chance what I write can be read by someone else, and therefore I take care what I write about.
Oh, and thank you for keeping the discourse on a respectful level. :)
Re: Telegram: Voice Chats 2.0:Channels, Millions of Listeners, Recorded Chats
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
The simplest explanation for this is the fact that the desktop apps are native apps and not based on the massive and sluggish electron framework.
I don't think this necessarily has to hold true (Discord for instance have implemented their apps really well), but in reality this holds true for most electron apps in my experience.
Discord is unusable at times too. But compared to other Electron shits, Discord is above average when it comes to performance. But in the end, when compared to Native apps, performance wise, Discord is still shit. It's nowhere near Telegram.
Re: Telegram: Voice Chats 2.0:Channels, Millions of Listeners, Recorded Chats
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you have 2 devices, one device can send messages to the other, all e2e encrypted. It's the same for group chats: if you are part of a chat, any participant can send you the history of the chat. All those issues are protocol-related. E2E only stipulates that the message can't be read between the two ends, it doesn't say you can't send a technical message for making a better UX.
Doesn't even have to send the full history of the chat, it can only send you the encryption key while the history is stored on the server.
(At least Threema does it this way): Server doesn't really store the messages long term; only until the receiver picks it up. With just two devices - sender and receiver - you have a guarantee that once the single receiver picks it up, there's none else to do the same and can be safely dropped.