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

Telegram Became the Anti-Facebook

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 257 posts

Re: Telegram Became the Anti-Facebook

#61

Post by fastball »

kitsunesoba wrote: post #39
shp0ngle wrote: post #23

This article is good. Telegram is really weird and sketchy; the rants Durov posts on his channel against WhatsApp usually make no sense; and their claims of security are dubious. And TON was a disaster. On the other hand. If I did any social organizing today, I would definitely use Telegram. Signal is fine , but nobody is using it and the UX is just worse. I don't trust Facebook to randomly not shut everything down b…

Telegram is ridiculously smooth, runs on everything, doesn’t treat any platform as an afterthought (despite having the electron thing, Signal is still very mobile oriented), and isn’t Facebook. It’s about as good as you’re going to get without making big sacrifices somewhere.

The reason Telegram is able to easily outclass WA and Signal in the UX department is due to the lack of E2EE.

If you don't need/want that it is clearly superior, but if you do...

Re: Telegram Became the Anti-Facebook

#62

Post by Krasnol »

dijit wrote: post #3

"Telegram is favoured by Jihadists" "Telegram is Russian Spying" "Telegram has extremely weak crypto" "Telegram is used by pedophiles" "Telegram is used by far-right terrorists" .... Use Signal! sigh The amount of times people bash on telegram is becoming painful. But lets take a logical argument; NSA has made it's mission in backdooring basically everything. We know from the Snowden revalations that their technical…

> Addendum: all of these same complaints (save: weak crypto) can be used against Signal.

Better and E2E crypto is the main argument for Signal though.

This is a significant difference between those two. You can't just ignore it if you build up such a case.

Re: Telegram Became the Anti-Facebook

#63

Post by weberer »

kaba0 wrote: post #44
paulpauper wrote: post #8

telegram is way overrated. too hard to create an account, takes up too much memory, accounts do get closed for automated/arbitrary reasons. not at all like described in the article .

How does it take up too much memory? It has the very best client on every single platform.

Maybe that person is comparing it to more traditional chat clients like Pidgin or Hexchat. Right now on my Manjaro desktop, Telegram is using 230mb of RAM, while Pidgin is taking 46mb. That being said, its a hell of a lot better than Slack, which could use up several gigabytes if you were in multiple groups.

Re: Telegram Became the Anti-Facebook

#64

Post by gonehome »

kitsunesoba wrote: post #39
shp0ngle wrote: post #23

This article is good. Telegram is really weird and sketchy; the rants Durov posts on his channel against WhatsApp usually make no sense; and their claims of security are dubious. And TON was a disaster. On the other hand. If I did any social organizing today, I would definitely use Telegram. Signal is fine , but nobody is using it and the UX is just worse. I don't trust Facebook to randomly not shut everything down b…

Telegram is ridiculously smooth, runs on everything, doesn’t treat any platform as an afterthought (despite having the electron thing, Signal is still very mobile oriented), and isn’t Facebook. It’s about as good as you’re going to get without making big sacrifices somewhere.

Isn't the big sacrifice with Telegram security?

I get that people like its UX, but if you're sacrificing security for UX then basically anything becomes fine?

Re: Telegram Became the Anti-Facebook

#65

Post by caskstrength »

EGreg wrote: post #7
dijit wrote: post #3

"Telegram is favoured by Jihadists" "Telegram is Russian Spying" "Telegram has extremely weak crypto" "Telegram is used by pedophiles" "Telegram is used by far-right terrorists" .... Use Signal! sigh The amount of times people bash on telegram is becoming painful. But lets take a logical argument; NSA has made it's mission in backdooring basically everything. We know from the Snowden revalations that their technical…

Telegram and Signal are the best we have out of CENTRALIZED solutions. Both are founded by anarchists who like end-to-end encryption and user empowerment. One accuses the other of being less secure and easily backdoored by governments… but the actual problem is — they are both centralized. We don’t even need to resort to conspiracy theories — all Germany would have to do to ban Telegram is make Apple take it out of i…

> Both are founded by anarchists who like end-to-end encryption and user empowerment.

Telegram didn't have e2e encryption for a long time and its chats are still not e2e encrypted by default. Also, I would hardly call Durov an anarchist.

Re: Telegram Became the Anti-Facebook

#66

Post by rvz »

shp0ngle wrote: post #23

This article is good. Telegram is really weird and sketchy; the rants Durov posts on his channel against WhatsApp usually make no sense; and their claims of security are dubious. And TON was a disaster. On the other hand. If I did any social organizing today, I would definitely use Telegram. Signal is fine , but nobody is using it and the UX is just worse. I don't trust Facebook to randomly not shut everything down b…

> On the other hand. If I did any social organizing today, I would definitely use Telegram. Signal is fine, but nobody is using it and the UX is just worse. I don't trust Facebook to randomly not shut everything down because some outsourced content moderator in New Delhi had a bad sleep.

I don't see how Telegram is any different to say, Signal. It may have better apps, UX, features and more which that alone makes it a compelling competitor but its optional E2EE support is quite damning.

The great thing about regulations is that it stops such suspicious projects like TON dead in their tracks. After the ICO madness in 2017, unregistered ICOs have become illegal and TON fell in that category.

But who knows, maybe when the terrorists, extremists, scammers and fraudsters realise that Telegram is not E2EE by default or layman terms 'not secure', perhaps they would run to Signal and chat amongst themselves about using a private untraceable cryptocurrency like MobileCoin to fund and plan their operations. [0] [1].

[0] https://www.theverge.com/22249391/signal-app-abuse-messaging...

[1] https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/03/13/telegram-signal-apps-ri...

Re: Telegram Became the Anti-Facebook

#67

Post by leshenka »

paulpauper wrote: post #8

telegram is way overrated. too hard to create an account, takes up too much memory, accounts do get closed for automated/arbitrary reasons. not at all like described in the article .

Not saying that it's fine but

> accounts do get closed for automated/arbitrary reasons

can happen on any of big platforms

Re: Telegram Became the Anti-Facebook

#68

Post by danrocks »

Krasnol wrote: post #58
trees101 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

agreed, the giveaway is the label "far right" to describe anyone who doesn't agree with their politics.

So are they not allowed to write about the "far right" or doesn't it exist according to you?

What a massive strawman.

Re: Telegram Became the Anti-Facebook

#69

Post by msh »

fastball wrote: post #61
kitsunesoba wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Telegram is ridiculously smooth, runs on everything, doesn’t treat any platform as an afterthought (despite having the electron thing, Signal is still very mobile oriented), and isn’t Facebook. It’s about as good as you’re going to get without making big sacrifices somewhere.

The reason Telegram is able to easily outclass WA and Signal in the UX department is due to the lack of E2EE. If you don't need/want that it is clearly superior, but if you do...

WhatsApp just recently added E2E and before that was still outclassed by telegram.

Re: Telegram Became the Anti-Facebook

#70

Post by konart »

fastball wrote: post #61
kitsunesoba wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Telegram is ridiculously smooth, runs on everything, doesn’t treat any platform as an afterthought (despite having the electron thing, Signal is still very mobile oriented), and isn’t Facebook. It’s about as good as you’re going to get without making big sacrifices somewhere.

The reason Telegram is able to easily outclass WA and Signal in the UX department is due to the lack of E2EE. If you don't need/want that it is clearly superior, but if you do...

What does UX\UI has to do with E2EE?

Sure, Telegram team used more human resources elsewhere while WA and Signal where doing their E2EE magic, but once they where done - what stopped them from investing into everything else?

Post reply on HN