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

Telegram: Voice Chats 2.0:Channels, Millions of Listeners, Recorded Chats

telegram.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 128 posts

Re: Telegram: Voice Chats 2.0:Channels, Millions of Listeners, Recorded Chats

#41

Post by xorcist »

randomhodler84 wrote: post #33
TheChaplain wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just out of curiosity, what kind of discussion do you have that require e2e? Myself I use TG extensively with friends, family, girlfriend and I think I've used secret chats once when the gf wanted to send a naughty photo. It's not that I don't have anything to hide, it's just I choose what to say according to the environment and I feel the features of telegram far outweigh the con of not having e2e at all times.

Oh no. No. “You have nothing to share.” E2e by default or GTFO. This isn’t about your secrets. It’s about making your regular discourse indistinguishable from secrets. There is no con to e2e, and many cons for snake oil/plaintext.

> There is no con to e2e,

No multi device support.

No transcoding for video.

No shared history for group chats.

Scaling get progressively harder with increasing participants.

Re: Telegram: Voice Chats 2.0:Channels, Millions of Listeners, Recorded Chats

#42

Post by malikNF »

behnamoh wrote: post #16
antihero wrote: post #6

This looks bloody neat - Clubhouse seemed annoying and exclusive, whereas Telegram feels a lot more inclusive.

Exactly. I don't like how CH was only introduced for iOS and follows the same annoying strategy that Gmail used before (invitation).

We call it the Cartmanland[1] approach. Although I think CH is a really nice idea, that too much exclusive thing kept me away from getting an account there even if I have an invite to the platform.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cartmanland

Re: Telegram: Voice Chats 2.0:Channels, Millions of Listeners, Recorded Chats

#43

Post by rakoo »

xorcist wrote: post #41
randomhodler84 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh no. No. “You have nothing to share.” E2e by default or GTFO. This isn’t about your secrets. It’s about making your regular discourse indistinguishable from secrets. There is no con to e2e, and many cons for snake oil/plaintext.

> There is no con to e2e, No multi device support. No transcoding for video. No shared history for group chats. Scaling get progressively harder with increasing participants.

> No multi device support.

That's an issue with your client and protocol, not with e2e

> No shared history for group chats.

Same

> Scaling get progressively harder with increasing participants.

Same

> No transcoding for video.

Now that's a more palpable issue. Also no size reduction of photos which is probably more used as a media.

Re: Telegram: Voice Chats 2.0:Channels, Millions of Listeners, Recorded Chats

#44

Post by Strum355 »

WolfRazu wrote: post #37
rvz wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The simplest explanation for this is the fact that the desktop apps are native apps and not based on the massive and sluggish electron framework.

I don't think this necessarily has to hold true (Discord for instance have implemented their apps really well), but in reality this holds true for most electron apps in my experience.

As a heavy discord user, its performance is just nothing compared to a native app (gtk etc). Its notably not native in performance

Re: Telegram: Voice Chats 2.0:Channels, Millions of Listeners, Recorded Chats

#45

Post by hojjat12000 »

nikivi wrote: post #2

Curious how this can work for recording podcasts.

That is the first thing that I thought about. I know a lot influencers (political and not) on telegram. They can host live radio shows (and record it and call it a podcast). It's great. I'm curious what the community comes up with these new features.

Re: Telegram: Voice Chats 2.0:Channels, Millions of Listeners, Recorded Chats

#46

Post by newscracker »

blue_box wrote: post #13

I really like Telegram and these features but I don’t use it because they don’t have end2end encryption as default. Also you can’t create a secret group chat that you can start from your phone and continue from your Mac.

Actually, you can't start a secret group chat at all in Telegram. It supports secret chats only for chats between two people, and that's where it's tied to the devices used for initiating the chat.

Re: Telegram: Voice Chats 2.0:Channels, Millions of Listeners, Recorded Chats

#47

Post by rvz »

pearjuice wrote: post #3

This is what I would expect. Though Clubhouse is a novel idea, it's relatively easy for a plethora of social networks to implement something similar and immediately have the network effect of their already immense userbase. On Instagram/Youtube/Facebook people can already go live with video. I think we will very quickly see similar audio-rooms on these platforms.

> On Instagram/Youtube/Facebook people can already go live with video. I think we will very quickly see similar audio-rooms on these platforms.

Exactly what happened to Slack being killed by Microsoft Teams, Meerkat killed by both Periscope (Twitter), Instagram Live. Snapchat suffered the same thing with Instagram Stories; but although they survived, user growth slowed.

We will see lots of audio-rooms on IG, Facebook, Twitter, etc and Clubhouse will join Meerkat as another victim of this VC hype machine, who ironically are hyping them on Twitter!

Re: Telegram: Voice Chats 2.0:Channels, Millions of Listeners, Recorded Chats

#48

Post by 4ad »

WolfRazu wrote: post #37
rvz wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The simplest explanation for this is the fact that the desktop apps are native apps and not based on the massive and sluggish electron framework.

I don't think this necessarily has to hold true (Discord for instance have implemented their apps really well), but in reality this holds true for most electron apps in my experience.

> Discord for instance have implemented their apps really well

No they haven't. The discord electron app is a trash fire. I use discord in Safari. It's just as bad UI and UX and slowness as the electron crap, but at least I get a few more hours of battery life...

Since I removed the electron garbage from my phone, my battery life tripled from one day at most to three days...

Re: Telegram: Voice Chats 2.0:Channels, Millions of Listeners, Recorded Chats

#49

Post by throwawaysea »

Does Telegram perform any censorship or deplatforming like Twitter when it comes to controversial topics (like illegal immigration, trans issues, race issues, etc)? I see from this post they have public groups but I also worry that these tech companies are all too willing to deplatform those that disagree with the progressive political platform, especially when they try to make the turn towards monetization. That’s really my deciding factor for adopting something new, as I don’t wish to give any power to those who are against free speech principles.

It seems like Telegram has had their own pressures from the anti-speech/anti-freedom crowd so maybe they’re on the other side of this?

Apple sued for not banning Telegram https://reclaimthenet.org/apple-sued-by-pressure-group-for-n...

Google sued for not banning Telegram https://reclaimthenet.org/now-its-googles-turn-to-be-sued-fo...

Telegram CEO says reject being “held hostage by tech monopolies” https://reclaimthenet.org/telegram-adds-25m-users/

Re: Telegram: Voice Chats 2.0:Channels, Millions of Listeners, Recorded Chats

#50

Post by rPlayer6554 »

StavrosK wrote: post #12
rPlayer6554 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How long ago did you use signal? The UX is on par with WhatsApp. In fact I've found tiny things that signal does better (it groups sending multiple pictures into on "album" message instead of sending one message per picture like WhatsApp) The only place I could agree WhatsApp has a significantly better UX is with backing up messages.

WhatsApp does the album thing as well.

Hmmm interesting. It hasn't been doing it for me recently. Maybe it's a setting.
Post reply on HN