Earlier quoted context omitted.
For a nonprofit?
A nonprofit doesn't mean it's a charity.
A nonprofit asking for donations because of ? What is the definition of a charity then?
Privacy is priceless, but Signal is expensive
821–830 of 965 posts
Re: Privacy is priceless, but Signal is expensive
#822Earlier quoted context omitted.
With all due respect, it seems that you have conceded that a convenient, spam free, open option not only doesn’t exist in practice, but can’t in principle. That’s more than even I believe. I just think nobody in the OSS space has put the work in to figure it out yet. > I could get my parents who are nearing their 70s to use Element (Matrix) and it took them less than 10 minutes, even with me asking them to register t…
No, you got me wrong. I think that Matrix is convenient enough to be practical, and I think that the issue is that we keep holding it back because we keep waiting for "someone else in the OSS space to put in the work" to make it as convenient as the leading closed alternatives , which is a fool's errand. > Well in that case Element would be the solution we’re looking for, except that not everyone’s parents have someo…
> "someone else in the OSS space to put in the work" to make it as convenient as the leading closed alternatives, which is a fool's errand.
I don’t think I got you wrong at all - you’ve just reiterated that it isn’t as convenient, and can’t be made so.
> Why can't that Best Buy rep be trained to setup Element instead?
No reason. If some organization was willing to pay Best Buy to do that, I’m expect they would.
Re: Privacy is priceless, but Signal is expensive
#823Earlier quoted context omitted.
They're not your parent, and if you treat them as such, that's a problem you need to work on addressing. Parental manipulation works because it's completely reasonable given the relationship for it to be effective. It's a betrayal of trust. If a company tries that tactic and it "works" too well, that's an opportunity to evaluate your psyche, not get mad at them.
Companies do it because it works. You're blaming bad behavior on the people that are being manipulated because, according to you, they have psychological problems. As if the people being manipulated being disabled somehow excuses the company taking advantage of them.
Exactly. Taking advantage of vulnerable people is not a legitimate defense, the fact that they are easily exploitable makes the behavior even less moral.
Re: Privacy is priceless, but Signal is expensive
#824Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can export to markdown apparently. Who's locked in? It might be a pain to import that into any other app but I don't think any messaging app is going to make that easy. You still have all your data if you want to bail
> pain That's how lock ins manifest themselves
[dead]
Re: Privacy is priceless, but Signal is expensive
#825Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who is reproducing these and publishing results? Moxie made it very clear he never wants third parties like f-droid -actually- reproducing and signing packages for distribution to de-googled signature-enforcing android distros etc. Providing side-loadable apks as an alternative a joke. Third party builds and distribution would serve as public canary and be better for privacy forbidden. He argued the tracking advantag…
What’s your solution to this?
Something built like any other internet protocol with staying power.
A federated network with multiple strong client and server implementations that are able to be built, reproduced, and distributed by multiple independent parties. Like Matrix.
Matrix is far from perfect yet but it is miles beyond Signal in being a sustainable solution that can survive any single point of failure.
Re: Privacy is priceless, but Signal is expensive
#826> Storage: $1.3 million dollars per year. > Servers: $2.9 million dollars per year. > Registration Fees: $6 million dollars per year. > Total Bandwidth: $2.8 million dollars per year. > Additional Services: $700,000 dollars per year. Signal pays more for delivering verification SMS during sign-up, than for all other infrastructure (except traffic) combined. Wow, that sounds excessive.
Phone numbers have become the de facto version of "Internet stamps" for identity verification. They are near-ubiquitous on a per-user level, but hard to accumulate without significant cost. (Unlike email addresses.) But the down side is that phone verification tends to be on a per-service level. So, for instance, Signal incurs these costs when they verify their users, and every other service incurs these same costs w…
> but hard to accumulate without significant cost
Varies heavily by region. The shop opposite my house has ~50 SIM cards on the shelf, for £0.99/ea.
Re: Privacy is priceless, but Signal is expensive
#827Earlier quoted context omitted.
bro, you're working for one of chat programs, yes? never heard of communick before. won't ever use it. if people ask me about it, i will show them how a person related to communick behaves in public.
You are creating an ad-hominem by thinking that I can not criticize Signal because I have a competing offer. And to add insult to injury, you seem to have a misconception of what Communick is. Communick is not "a chat program". Communick is a service provider, which promotes and works only with truly open protocols. There is no custom client or lock-in based feature that I have. This means that if you are my customer…
yes, it's an ad hominem. people need to know who are you and what incentives behind them. if you're from a competing provider, other will need to take that into account.
also, if you want to peddle your stuff, make your own announcements or something.
Re: Privacy is priceless, but Signal is expensive
#828Earlier quoted context omitted.
> safeguarding of children against mutilation and sterilisation, I am so, so tired. None of that happens. GnRH analogues are commonly used in gender affirming care, these are reversible. Surgery is not done on minors. > the protection of women's single-sex spaces, Predatory men have absolutely no problems finding opportunities to predate on women. This made up crap need not happen. You are parroting sound bites on is…
> Surgery is not done on minors. Sadly, this is not true. See for example this paper on 'gender-affirming' mastectomies, where the cohort included girls as young as 12 years old: https://journals.lww.com/annalsplasticsurgery/Abstract/2022/... Also this article from Reuters on rates of 'gender-affirming treatment' in children, from health insurance data, which shows that girls as young as 13 are receiving 'top surgery…
Trans women are not males who call themselves women, though.
If you insist they are , that's denial of trans existence and that's the road to genocide.
Trans women are not males who call themselves women, though.
If you insist they are , that's denial of trans existence and that's the road to genocide.
Apparently I was wrong on top surgeries. I will be more careful with phrasing then. However, sterilization (aka genital surgery) still is not a thing.
Re: Privacy is priceless, but Signal is expensive
#829> Storage: $1.3 million dollars per year. > Servers: $2.9 million dollars per year. > Registration Fees: $6 million dollars per year. > Total Bandwidth: $2.8 million dollars per year. > Additional Services: $700,000 dollars per year. Signal pays more for delivering verification SMS during sign-up, than for all other infrastructure (except traffic) combined. Wow, that sounds excessive.
I wish their justification for dropping SMS capability from their Android app to move away from phone numbers was a little more transparent about the obvious cost aspect rather than solely sticking to the patronizing "we're saving insecure messaging users from themselves" messaging they had. I found it pretty obnoxious. I think people generally get "valuable nonprofit + huge expense = not-sustainable = bad."
It's a lot more nuanced than that: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33258684
Re: Privacy is priceless, but Signal is expensive
#830Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, you got me wrong. I think that Matrix is convenient enough to be practical, and I think that the issue is that we keep holding it back because we keep waiting for "someone else in the OSS space to put in the work" to make it as convenient as the leading closed alternatives , which is a fool's errand. > Well in that case Element would be the solution we’re looking for, except that not everyone’s parents have someo…
> "someone else in the OSS space to put in the work" to make it as convenient as the leading closed alternatives, which is a fool's errand. I don’t think I got you wrong at all - you’ve just reiterated that it isn’t as convenient, and can’t be made so . > Why can't that Best Buy rep be trained to setup Element instead? No reason. If some organization was willing to pay Best Buy to do that, I’m expect they would.
> can’t be made so.
It can in principle, but not in practice. To become something attainable in practice we would have to start supporting the companies that are focused on the more important things first until they are mature enough to be able to dedicate time and resources to optimize for convenience. The problem is that when we prize convenience above other things and we end up with stupid things like customers arguing about the color of their speech bubbles.