21–30 of 106 posts
My first question on this sort of thing was how well does it work with GMail. And they have an FAQ entry on it: https://providers.delta.chat/gmail
In a sensible world, we would be using this, instead of whatsapp. It is amazing that even really a vast majority of, even technical people, not once stopped and looked at whatsapp, and said "Wait, e-mail can do this, we just need a pretty UI".
Does this solve all the other problems with encrypted email, which is not widely used for a reason?
Here's a discussion
https://www.latacora.com/blog/2020/02/19/stop-using-encrypte...
In a sensible world, we would be using this, instead of whatsapp. It is amazing that even really a vast majority of, even technical people, not once stopped and looked at whatsapp, and said "Wait, e-mail can do this, we just need a pretty UI".
> Reliable instant messaging
If it's based on e-mail, it's just not. (if we assume generally close-to-realtime delivery and not being blocked by random recipients)
I tried to use it, liked the concept, but the way it handles email is a mess, making it unusable for my use case of trying to use it as an alternative mail client for my normal mail account.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Signal and WhatsApp are likely a step ahead in terms of privacy WhatsApp is closed source, so whatever they claim to can't be proven. And remember that both WhatsApp and Signal are legally required not to disclose to you whether they are spying on you or not.
> WhatsApp is closed source, so whatever they claim to can't be proven E2E only requires a correctly-designed client, not a correctly-designed server. Since any binary can always be deobfuscated, deliberately putting in a backdoor in the client would be an extremely risky PR move, especially in an app as big as WhatsApp, and one surely receiving lots of attention from security researchers. Not to mention that OpenWhi…
In a sensible world, we would be using this, instead of whatsapp. It is amazing that even really a vast majority of, even technical people, not once stopped and looked at whatsapp, and said "Wait, e-mail can do this, we just need a pretty UI".
From the website: > Reliable instant messaging If it's based on e-mail, it's just not. (if we assume generally close-to-realtime delivery and not being blocked by random recipients)
In a sensible world, we would be using this, instead of whatsapp. It is amazing that even really a vast majority of, even technical people, not once stopped and looked at whatsapp, and said "Wait, e-mail can do this, we just need a pretty UI".
WhatsApp lets people find each other with phone numbers instead email addresses. This has a profound difference in real-world usability because it decreases friction.
Before WhatsApp, people texted each other using cell companies' SMS service.
Why did Person A (who already had an email address) send a SMS text to Person B (who also already had an email address) to chat?!? Because both people already had each others' phone number in their smartphone's address books. Recording each other's email address is less likely so it won't be used as "ids" to chat -- especially between friends & family.
To wit, my mother has already memorized my brand new phone number that I've only had for a few years but she doesn't know my email address at all even though I've sent it and re-sent it to her multiple times. To normal people, the phone numbers are more sacred than email addresses. WhatsApp was a continuation of the conveniences of SMS -- without paying 10 cents per message to the mobile phone carriers.
Friction from cognitive overhead is a big deal in technology adoption.