251–260 of 262 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
how much do you spend on the service that's so crucial to you? What do you expect to get when giving nothing? Whoever is keeping a Whatsapp Account nowadays shits on the privacy of all their addressbook contacts and can't be helped, obviously. It may not be a friend.
Ummm, I've paid more for WhatsApp than I did for Signal. The money for signal kinda came (in a roudabout way) from the money I gave to WhatsApp.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I definitely agree with you on a user level. But on a practical level, I wouldn't want to be on 24/7 pager duty if I was part of signal, not getting paid much, if anything for it. I don't think matrix is there yet as a good replacement, at least for my use case. It's just not mature enough. I know, chicken and egg problem, but I don't want to be debugging my primary form of communication. It's too important.
Is the salary that Signal employees receive known? They may just as well be very well compensated. After all there is a well funded foundation backing the development and operations of the platform.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
WhatsApp has a desktop version.
WhatsApp's desktop version is crippled because it requires connectivity to your phone in order to use it. I believe they're working on a client that doesn't require that, but it's not here yet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a thoughtful rebuttal, but I'm not sure it hits the point. As usual, there's nuance here. The top selling points of Signal are security and privacy. If you want these things, then there's a lot of things that maintaining complete control of the protocol gives you. From the original "Ecosystem is moving" essay: "By contrast, WhatsApp was able to introduce end-to-end encryption to over a billion users with a singl…
TLS/SSL is a better comparison, and it's a protocol which has enjoyed widespread and unprecedented success in securing the privacy of users worldwide, despite being decentralized. The tradeoffs Moxie was thinking of when rejecting federation had more to do with centralizing his power over Signal rather than any kind of technical limitations.
I'm not yet aware of any federated approaches that prevent a server from connecting a sender and recipient, but would love to be educated otherwise.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Element on the Matrix protocol. Not perfect UX but keeps improving. Free but it has a solid business model servicing business cases with the open source set stack that suits corporate needs.
Last time I tried Matrix the message delivery was unreliable and E2E was a second class citizen with some big compromises. Has it gotten any better?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We’ve never had message delivery problems on Matrix (unless I missed something), and E2EE has been turned on by default since early 2020. You may have been on an overloaded server, or trying years ago.
It was a couple years ago, before 2020. Back then, I had an issue with delayed push notifications. I'll give it another try.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Invading your privacy is literally Zuck’s business model. The entire company operates based on selling an analysis of you and your friends to the highest bidder. Whether they planned that from the start or not, that is the basis of their funding, their IPO and their current valuation. All their products synergise to better invade your life. Duroc may not be squeaky clean, but he has a much better public record on sta…
>but he has a much better public record on standing up for ethical causes than Zuck. Paying lip service is not the same as practicing what you preach. I'm not saying Mark Zuckerberg is on your side. I'm saying WA team managed to implement Signal Protocol before Zuckerberg et. al. realized what was happening wrt. WA's data aggregation capabilities. Also, Durov isn't called the Mark Zuckerberg of Russia for nothing. Al…
I didn't say it was. I said the Telegram _story_ was _better_ than WA's at this point.
> when on tech level it's worse than WhatsApp?
I'm not arguing that Telegram has a better or worse technical model; I'm arguing that the WA business model and senior leadership and share structure, which controls its tech, creates a _story_ which is less trustworthy.
I take your points about WA appearing technically better.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What doesn't count?
paying whatsapp doesn't pay for the signal service.
Brian Acton then used that money to bankroll Signal, which unlike WhatsApp doesn't seem to have a clear path to profitability in the long term.