31–40 of 55 posts
There is no reason for unencrypted messaging.
This is a fundamental market failure.
It is only through bundling these messaging services with other services + platform dominance that unencrypted messaging still lives.
Everything Meta has built is antithetical to privacy. I’m surprised this feature existed at all.
I’m curious if this was built off the work Moxie did with them back in the day, but as I recall Facebook Messenger had E2EE built off Signal’s technology a decade or so back, and the zeitgeist back then was at least a little bit less user hostile.
"In March, a spokesperson for Meta told The Guardian that the decision to abandon encryption was due to low uptake. "Very few people were opting in to end-to-end encrypted messaging in DMs, so we're removing this option from Instagram in the coming months," the spokesperson said." I wonder what it's like being a spokesperson for a company (or administration) where everyone including yourself knows your statements are…
I've noticed it is a quite common attitude in society, not paid enough to care so they don't.
I do not think any person would freely choose unencrypted messaging. There is no reason for unencrypted messaging. This is a fundamental market failure. It is only through bundling these messaging services with other services + platform dominance that unencrypted messaging still lives.
Many people do, e.g. by switching from Whatsapp to Telegram.
The market is working alright; people are (uninformedly) voting with their wallets (or rather, their personal data).
Everything Meta has built is antithetical to privacy. I’m surprised this feature existed at all.
I’m curious if this was built off the work Moxie did with them back in the day, but as I recall Facebook Messenger had E2EE built off Signal’s technology a decade or so back, and the zeitgeist back then was at least a little bit less user hostile.
"In March, a spokesperson for Meta told The Guardian that the decision to abandon encryption was due to low uptake. "Very few people were opting in to end-to-end encrypted messaging in DMs, so we're removing this option from Instagram in the coming months," the spokesperson said." I wonder what it's like being a spokesperson for a company (or administration) where everyone including yourself knows your statements are…
I've noticed it is a quite common attitude in society, not paid enough to care so they don't.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes.
No, it won't. All the "news" about that at the end of last year was 100% nonsense, started by tech "influencers" who cited nothing and showed nothing. https://lifehacker.com/tech/meta-is-not-scraping-dms-to-trai...
> The best thing you can do to preserve your privacy and security with your Meta messages is to use end-to-end encryption (E2EE) whenever possible. WhatsApp has E2EE built-in, and Meta has automatically started rolling it out for Messenger, but you might need to manually start an E2EE chat for existing conversations in the app. The same goes for Instagram: Meta offers E2EE, but you need to enable it yourself. In either app, tap the name of the chat to check whether or not that conversation is currently E2EE.
I do not think any person would freely choose unencrypted messaging. There is no reason for unencrypted messaging. This is a fundamental market failure. It is only through bundling these messaging services with other services + platform dominance that unencrypted messaging still lives.
Unencrypted messaging is easier and more convenient, just login from anywhere and done. So there are actual technical and rational reasons to choose against e2e.
Everything Meta has built is antithetical to privacy. I’m surprised this feature existed at all.
I’m curious if this was built off the work Moxie did with them back in the day, but as I recall Facebook Messenger had E2EE built off Signal’s technology a decade or so back, and the zeitgeist back then was at least a little bit less user hostile.
That grew into the Messenger mobile app. They eventually added private messaging, but it was never popular/defaulted because users expected the chat moles on facebook.com to be able to show the same messages as the mobile app. If facebook.com can't read your messages, it can't show them there.
"In March, a spokesperson for Meta told The Guardian that the decision to abandon encryption was due to low uptake. "Very few people were opting in to end-to-end encrypted messaging in DMs, so we're removing this option from Instagram in the coming months," the spokesperson said." I wonder what it's like being a spokesperson for a company (or administration) where everyone including yourself knows your statements are…
I've noticed it is a quite common attitude in society, not paid enough to care so they don't.
Americans can’t even agree on persecuting pedophiles, what makes you think they can agree on a clear loss of privacy for the normies that only people in power will only benefit from?
It’s all exhausting