351–360 of 458 posts
TikTok and other social media apps' business models are antithetical to privacy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Parents are already allowed to restrict their children access to 'dangerous' things like open computers or knives.
Parents are also allowed to restrict their children access to alcohol and cigarettes, but it seems a government ban on them buying those things works better
That's exactly how I'm doing technology. I sign my kid up for kid accounts. And I apply parental controls.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The government are able to access your conversations, data and connections with e2ee in place already. I don't see how not having e2ee would have an effect on that ability in any way.
Please provide proof for these claims.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tiktok has private messaging, and it is used by hundreds of millions of people. IMO no consumer service should have private 1:1 messaging without e2e. Either only do public messaging (ie. Like a forum), or implement e2e.
Tiktok has direct messages, they don't even call them private. It's better that they're honest about this, nobody should believe for a second that WhatsApp or FB messages are truly E2EE. DM on social media shouldn't be used for anything remotely private. It's a convenience feature, nothing more.
Meta still tracks analytics which isn't good for privacy, but I'm not aware of any news of them or 3rd parties reading messages without consent of one of the 1st parties? Signal is probably much better though
I don’t really understand how we are supposed to believe in e2ee in closed proprietary apps. Even if some trusted auditor confirms they have plumbed in libsignal correctly, we have no way of knowing that their rendering code is free of content scanning hooks. We know the technology exists. Apple had it all polished and ready to go for image scanning. I suppose the only thing in which we can place our faith is that it…
I've been making this argument for a long time, and it's never popular. People want to believe in E2EE, it's almost like religion at this point. Protecting people is synonymous with E2EE, even if you cant verify it, and it can be potentially broken. I was even more controversial and singled out Signal as an example: https://blog.dijit.sh/i-don-t-trust-signal/
I think this is... fine? Am I just totally naive. I think it's fine to say "You don't really have privacy on this app" - as long as there are relatively good options of apps that do have privacy (and I think there are). TikTok is really a public by default type of social media, there's not much idea of mutual following or closed groups. So sure, you don't have privacy on tiktok, if you want it you can move to snapcha…
> as long as there are relatively good options of apps that do have privacy (and I think there are) Once you have enormous network effect like TikTok has, you don't really have any free selection of alternative apps. You are free to use one, but you will be the only sad user over there. Regulations are needed that would force large platforms like TikTok and Instagram to enable federation, opening them up to actual co…
Lolololol. No, not regulations. Regulators. With the people we currently have voted into office in the US the only regulations we are going to get are ones saying Sam and Peter must look at everything you do all the time.
Until we stop voting for more authoritarianism, expect ever increasing amounts of authoritarianism.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tiktok has direct messages, they don't even call them private. It's better that they're honest about this, nobody should believe for a second that WhatsApp or FB messages are truly E2EE. DM on social media shouldn't be used for anything remotely private. It's a convenience feature, nothing more.
> nobody should believe for a second that WhatsApp or FB messages are truly E2EE. Meta still tracks analytics which isn't good for privacy, but I'm not aware of any news of them or 3rd parties reading messages without consent of one of the 1st parties? Signal is probably much better though
Yet. Until they say "We delete these messages after X time and they are gone gone, and we're not reading them" Assume they are reading them, or will read them and the information just hasn't got out yet.
I mean we keep finding more and more cases where companies like FB and Google were reading messages years ago and it wasn't till now we found out.