231–240 of 241 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> meta knows that they are far far more popular in the population than politicians Not sure where you live, but in Europe people are generally - with acknowledged caveats and exceptions - but generally speaking behind their governments. Politicians are indeed far more popular than Meta.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even without the privacy issues it is insane that you are forced to do business with certain corporations in order to fully participate in society. But most people don't care or open alternatives would be more popular.
> But most people don't care or open alternatives would be more popular. I disagree with your premise. Whatsapp wasn't always owned by FB/Meta. It had a huge user base then got bought out. Alternatives like Signal are popular, but it's hard to overcome inertia. Give them time.
I would rather say "Give time to decentralisation". It slowly became a standard. If more people abandon abusive software.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn't matter how big the fine is if the profit from the fine-yielding behavior is greater than the fine itself.
4% of global revenue...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>meta knows that they are far far more popular in the population than politicians, and politicians know that if they were to effectively stop facebook, the blowback would be immediate. If Facebook doesn't want to operate in a region where they're unable to accept payments from local residents that's their business.
what do you honestly think would happen? facebook says "we cannot serve the EU because your politicians made it illegal". People would immediately demand facebook be put back, and the politicians would have to comply, or be replaced. They would comply
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I perhaps don't know what I'm missing with WhatsApp, but I use Signal with Android-owning friends (iMessage for everyone else), and no-one has voiced displeasure - indeed it was _suggested_ by many of them, both technical and non-technical as preferable to SMS, so I don't think it can be that bad. I don't have special insight into either WhatsApp or Telegram, but I think given the founders and jurisdictions in which…
You'll find this interesting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blocking_Telegram_in_Russia I don't think Telegram deserves scrutiny. Not after what they've been able to accomplish and follow. > indeed it was _suggested_ by many of them, both technical and non-technical as preferable to SMS, so I don't think it can be that bad. It's not bad of course, but it's extremely hard to get WhatsApp users to switch to Signal than…
Every communication channel deserves scrutiny according to the threat model of a given user.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It isn't. It creates massive barriers for using e2ee
I get where you're coming from but Telegram is objectively better than WhatsApp due to several reasons: - Privacy controls for each user. - No hard requirement for a phone number. - Cloud encryption. - Open Source clients. - Telegram's track record. - Business model not revolving around selling user data. WhatsApp is a black box and nobody has any good arguments for it other than 'supposed' E2EE that nobody knows any…
Only if you pay
> - Open Source clients.
Mautrix/WhatsApp
> - Telegram's track record
Which is?
> WhatsApp is a black box and nobody has any good arguments for it other than 'supposed' E2EE that nobody knows anything about.
With Telegram you have a guarantee that it is not E2EE in group chats and single chats if you don't opt into a way worse UX/features.
> - Business model not revolving around selling user data.
True for Whatsapp as well, it's funded by business accounts and perhaps other parts of facebook
Earlier quoted context omitted.
what do you honestly think would happen? facebook says "we cannot serve the EU because your politicians made it illegal". People would immediately demand facebook be put back, and the politicians would have to comply, or be replaced. They would comply
You are so naive. EU residents aren't stupid and don't particularly like it when foreign companies try to manipulate them, much less ignore the law. Should Facebook choose to pull their services out of the EU the world will keep turning, and people will find alternatives.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I get where you're coming from but Telegram is objectively better than WhatsApp due to several reasons: - Privacy controls for each user. - No hard requirement for a phone number. - Cloud encryption. - Open Source clients. - Telegram's track record. - Business model not revolving around selling user data. WhatsApp is a black box and nobody has any good arguments for it other than 'supposed' E2EE that nobody knows any…
> - No hard requirement for a phone number Only if you pay > - Open Source clients. Mautrix/WhatsApp > - Telegram's track record Which is? > WhatsApp is a black box and nobody has any good arguments for it other than 'supposed' E2EE that nobody knows anything about. With Telegram you have a guarantee that it is not E2EE in group chats and single chats if you don't opt into a way worse UX/features. > - Business model…
I'm sorry, but that's not a good example. It doesn't even count as a legitimate client.
> Which is?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blocking_of_Telegram_in_Russia
https://hongkongfp.com/2020/07/05/exclusive-telegram-to-temp...
https://www.vice.com/en/article/a3yavb/russia-blocks-telegra...
https://sensortower.com/blog/hong-kong-protests-app-download...
> With Telegram you have a guarantee that it is not E2EE in group chats and single chats if you don't opt into a way worse UX/features.
You're saying this as if you have a guarantee that WhatsApp's E2EE is 100% correct. At least with Telegram, I know what data the app is collecting, where it's going and how it's being stored on the device.
> True for Whatsapp as well, it's funded by business accounts and perhaps other parts of facebook
Assumption again.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> - No hard requirement for a phone number Only if you pay > - Open Source clients. Mautrix/WhatsApp > - Telegram's track record Which is? > WhatsApp is a black box and nobody has any good arguments for it other than 'supposed' E2EE that nobody knows anything about. With Telegram you have a guarantee that it is not E2EE in group chats and single chats if you don't opt into a way worse UX/features. > - Business model…
> Mautrix/WhatsApp I'm sorry, but that's not a good example. It doesn't even count as a legitimate client. > Which is? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blocking_of_Telegram_in_Russia https://hongkongfp.com/2020/07/05/exclusive-telegram-to-temp... https://www.vice.com/en/article/a3yavb/russia-blocks-telegra... https://sensortower.com/blog/hong-kong-protests-app-download... > With Telegram you have a guarantee that it is…
why not? After all the client uses the multi-device API like the official client does
> You're saying this as if you have a guarantee that WhatsApp's E2EE is 100% correct.
I am not saying it like that. I am explicitly saying that with Telegram you have the guarantee that it is not E2EE, while there at least exist the possibility of WhatsApp being E2EE.
> Assumption again.
An observation, not assumption. WhatsApp wants to see money for business accounts: https://business.whatsapp.com/products/platform-pricing
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> meta knows that they are far far more popular in the population than politicians Not sure where you live, but in Europe people are generally - with acknowledged caveats and exceptions - but generally speaking behind their governments. Politicians are indeed far more popular than Meta.
until the politicians take the facebook away :)