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

Group Video Calls

telegram.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 183 posts

Re: Group Video Calls

#141

Post by joecool1029 »

decrypt wrote: post #109
joecool1029 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is kind of loaded. I do think Telegram does an excellent job at ephemerality from a practical standpoint. Without being able to audit their server though, we have no clue if 'disappeared' chats and messages are actually scrubbed from their server. I was once banned from the service for playing around with very old clients and had a back and forth with them over email for a week or so (it was re-enabled and they…

>Telegram does an excellent job at ephemerality from a practical standpoint. Without being able to audit their server though, we have no clue if 'disappeared' chats and messages are actually scrubbed from their server. Aren't disappearing messages a feature of secret chats? If my understanding is correct here, these messages are not backed up to the cloud. Rather they are stored within your device. That's precisely w…

I wasn't referencing E2EE, I was specifically talking about their regular 'cloud' chats. I am speaking of features like deleting old messages from prior chats or even going as far as removing your account. These are not possible to do on many other more secure chat systems, I cannot tell you how many new Matrix users are frustrated that this is not possible there but it's simply not in a federated system, cannot force other servers to scrub your server's messages. It is practical to have this ability to tear down comms and scrub a shareh/synched history but it is nor perfect.

You are correct about their secret chats. The secret chats limitations (inability to sync) actually encourage destroying and recreating sessions when needed vs Signal that is intended for longer synched sessions. Not having to worry about those sessions syncing to a system you may not be in front of is also a benefit.

Re: Group Video Calls

#142

Post by daredevil_kohai »

stereoradonc wrote: post #96

This is one of the best feature sets, and I waited for over two years; ever since WhatsApp had got it. I find that stance of the community strange here - no "e2ee". Privacy is important, but your chat history hardly reflects that. There are other ways to get your history or track your digital trails. 200,000 users for group chat. Unlimited users for voice chat (like clubhouse). 30 users for group video calling. That…

If my understanding is correct. VC users at a time in a room in clubhouse is limited.

Re: Group Video Calls

#143

Post by vinay427 »

stereoradonc wrote: post #96

This is one of the best feature sets, and I waited for over two years; ever since WhatsApp had got it. I find that stance of the community strange here - no "e2ee". Privacy is important, but your chat history hardly reflects that. There are other ways to get your history or track your digital trails. 200,000 users for group chat. Unlimited users for voice chat (like clubhouse). 30 users for group video calling. That…

> Secret chats - the e2ee chats self-destruct between users and stay on the device where it has been initiated.

Is this supposed to be a feature? Telegram themselves claim that this inability to backup chats is at least part of why they don't enable E2EE before mentioning that it allows users choice over data storage, which seems silly in the face of apps that allow for encrypted backups of E2EE messages. [1]

Signal backups are obviously E2EE and can be moved between devices by copying an encrypted blob or directly transferring over Wi-Fi, depending on your platform.

Meanwhile, on Telegram if I reinstall the app all of these chats are gone. If I change phones and posess both devices concurrently, there's still no official way to move chat histories. E2EE feels like a crippled afterthought on Telegram considering so many of the interesting Telegram chat features (or just backups/transfers) don't seem to work with it.

[1] https://telegram.org/faq#q-why-not-just-make-all-chats-39sec...

Re: Group Video Calls

#144

Post by fwn »

vetinari wrote: post #45
AegirLeet wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not having it enabled by default means most people will never enable it at all. That's just plain reckless. Privacy is a human right; it shouldn't be part of any "trade-off", just like you can't sell yourself into slavery, even if you really wanted to.

> Not having it enabled by default means most people will never enable it at all. That's just plain reckless. Yet, there we are. People value that other functionality more. You may not like it, but that's how they are. > Privacy is a human right; it shouldn't be part of any "trade-off", just like you can't sell yourself into slavery, even if you really wanted to. You are now off the rails. The problem with the trade-…

> People value that other functionality more. You may not like it, but that's how they are.

I've once listened to a presentation given by someone from the company behind AdBlock Plus. They were explaining their (back then) new "Acceptable Ads" program and how an overwhelming amount of users chose to let the program enabled.

They even had a pie chart showing over 90% participation in the acceptable ads program and interpreted it as user choice. ("That's how they are")

After the presentation I asked whether they've tested how many users actively enable Acceptable Ads participation in the settings if it's off by default. To noones surprise they did not run such a test.

Not changing the defaults should not be interpreted as user choice if the same settings end-state is not reproducible with other defaults.

Usually any default, no matter how hostile, stays set. The reality is that users can be nudged easily and rarely ever change any settings at all.

Re: Group Video Calls

#145

Post by crossroadsguy »

I’m back to WhatsApp after many months of full time Signal usage. People started leaving Signal one by one. Some of them really tried. Not many had joined anyway. For most remaining contacts Signal was and for more it remained installed just for me.

A medical emergency in the family and I was back on WhatsApp in a second.

Signal kept crashing, remained full of UI bugs (the kind I just couldn’t believe is there has been there for months and years; yeah the simple and silly ones), functionality bugs, slightly better than barely useable calling, delayed messages, broken notifications, extremely frustrating and broken encryption key update even when there was no such actual update — while the foundation kept giving us new emojis/stickers and worked on crypto. Nice gesture I reckon. And yeah, still a closed garden.

No opinion really. It’s just how it is. I use Apple’s phone and computer which is proprietary and closed garden by design, effort, and lobbying. Who am I kidding.

So no, I’m not going to say Telegram is shady. Maybe it is but so are others. Maybe not Signal (or is it?). It’s just that Telegram is far from being the personal messaging/communication app, at least around me. It’s an extension of other online communities like subreddits. Discord is eating into that share anyway. It’s used for apartment groups. COVID update channels (especially in India where very high up offices still have public Gmail IDs) and all that. Oh, they do have literally the best mobile and desktop apps among its peers. By many miles.

Re: Group Video Calls

#146

Post by vetinari »

fwn wrote: post #144
vetinari wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not having it enabled by default means most people will never enable it at all. That's just plain reckless. Yet, there we are. People value that other functionality more. You may not like it, but that's how they are. > Privacy is a human right; it shouldn't be part of any "trade-off", just like you can't sell yourself into slavery, even if you really wanted to. You are now off the rails. The problem with the trade-…

> People value that other functionality more. You may not like it, but that's how they are. I've once listened to a presentation given by someone from the company behind AdBlock Plus. They were explaining their (back then) new "Acceptable Ads" program and how an overwhelming amount of users chose to let the program enabled. They even had a pie chart showing over 90% participation in the acceptable ads program and int…

This is not about default being certain function off.

This is about that one functionality being mutually exclusive with other functionality. If you enable E2EE, you disable cloud sync/history, multi-device use, message forwarding, etc. In normal use, users want the latter and if they need the secret chat, it is available.

In your example with Adblock Plus, there was no trade-off (to the user; there obviously was for the company). With Telegram, there is.

Re: Group Video Calls

#147

Post by fwn »

vetinari wrote: post #146
fwn wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People value that other functionality more. You may not like it, but that's how they are. I've once listened to a presentation given by someone from the company behind AdBlock Plus. They were explaining their (back then) new "Acceptable Ads" program and how an overwhelming amount of users chose to let the program enabled. They even had a pie chart showing over 90% participation in the acceptable ads program and int…

This is not about default being certain function off. This is about that one functionality being mutually exclusive with other functionality. If you enable E2EE, you disable cloud sync/history, multi-device use, message forwarding, etc. In normal use, users want the latter and if they need the secret chat, it is available. In your example with Adblock Plus, there was no trade-off (to the user; there obviously was for…

> This is about that one functionality being mutually exclusive with other functionality.

That is a design decision made by Telegram. My e2ee Signal and Matrix groups sync just fine across devices, preserve message history, allow message forwarding, etc.

Not enabeling those features is a nudge against using the e2ee-feature. Facebook Messenger does the same by crippling their encrypted chat experience.

The reason most people on WhatsApp enable unencrypted cloud backups is not because they really desire their message history to be leaked to Google/Apple but because they get occasionally nudged by a popup to enable it.

Those nudges work. It does not matter whether it's a good or a bad action they nudge to make one central assumption about them: settings should not be interpreted as user choice if the results aren't tested against complementary nudges.

Re: Group Video Calls

#148

Post by fragileone »

throwaway13337 wrote: post #119
qwertox wrote: post #34

To me Telegram feels like the red corner district of a city. I simply don't feel like I can trust it, there's something very shady about it. I wouldn't be surprised if Telegram reads those exclusive Bitcoin whale groups and uses that insider info. Group chats are not end to end encrypted. That being said, WhatsApp is like the authorized garage where you know that you'll get the service which is officially recognized…

Care to qualify that speculation with some evidence? It seems like whenever telegram is brought up here, there's a lot of speculation about it not being trustworthy but no concrete evidence. The client is open source. While not end to end encrypted by default, it shares that property with most messengers. E2E limits search-ability and other features so it's a tradeoff. I have to wonder if part of why this is mostly b…

They roll their own crypto and group chats can't be end-to-end encrypted anyway. It's even worse security than WhatsApp, let alone Signal.

Re: Group Video Calls

#149

Post by stereoradonc »

bhtru wrote: post #132
stereoradonc wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I( completely agree with whatever you have listed here and the reason why the app is up for bashing is because of the antecedents of the owner. How does everything which has its origins in US is touched up with fairy duust while anything that may have a remote link with Russia is garbage? Signal is garbage. They are riding on the coattails of marketing (and that's what investment money does)

Care to elaborate why you believe Signal is garbage? Is it for technical reasons?

1) Platform sync is bad. 2) Backups drain my battery. 3) Notifications across platform are weird. 4) Video calling quality is now an issue. Previously it wasn't. 5) No usernames and no ingrained privacy controls to prevent users from calling me.

Re: Group Video Calls

#150

Post by stereoradonc »

vinay427 wrote: post #143
stereoradonc wrote: post #96

This is one of the best feature sets, and I waited for over two years; ever since WhatsApp had got it. I find that stance of the community strange here - no "e2ee". Privacy is important, but your chat history hardly reflects that. There are other ways to get your history or track your digital trails. 200,000 users for group chat. Unlimited users for voice chat (like clubhouse). 30 users for group video calling. That…

> Secret chats - the e2ee chats self-destruct between users and stay on the device where it has been initiated. Is this supposed to be a feature? Telegram themselves claim that this inability to backup chats is at least part of why they don't enable E2EE before mentioning that it allows users choice over data storage, which seems silly in the face of apps that allow for encrypted backups of E2EE messages. [1] Signal…

I use Telegram as a daily driver and I don't find any reason to be constrained about whatever you mention. I use Telegram on iPad, Windows, Android and they sync perfectly- that's why it's cloud messenger. Data migration isn't an issue at all. No one's asking you to use a non-e2ee client. But find reason and merit in those who do- try it for the convenience and then uninstall it if it doesn't serve your purpose.
Post reply on HN