Anything goes through closed servers. Even more, serverless chat protocols tend to go through multiple users PCs (they are not open to you).
point of encrypting stuff. at least telegram supports it
I’m pretty sure telegram doesn’t support plaintext transfers.
its like saying facebook is private
I didn’t call telegram private.
not encrypted by default
Not e2e encrypted ≠ not encrypted.
its closed
Client is open source and you can use your own client with custom functionality if you like. I imagine nothing stops anyone from adding their own e2e implementations on top of it.
Yeah I’ve never used matrix really.
Does it sync automatically between desktop and mobile? Can I share an image into it on mobile and have it a few seconds later on laptop?
I have no use for it for now and as long as it’s still electron on desktop I don’t want to have it running.
Signal is not applicable when you need a public space for people to just have a discussion, like in discord. Signal clients are clunky and rely on cross sync from what I see, while telegram clients are well made and convenient to use. Even Whatsapp went away from electron so I’d choose it over signal any day.
The title seems off. What does it mean to be kept alive for N64 games if you still need assets to play those games in this form, and assets are basically illegal to share the same way roms are?
I found quite a few articles on various sites about the matter. More articles mean more raised awareness.
deleted by creator
Wrong, it helps raise awareness at the very least.
Israel has been committing war crimes for 7 months straight now.
Why only 7 months and not more? Did something change Israel’s intentions to spend more time on commiting war crimes?
I could say hamas has been commiting war crimes for years now. Would that be wrong?
A control lever like this can never be idiotic.
No that’s not what I didn’t understand. The problem itself as you described it seems either a non-issue or something very few people (who’s already using telegram for some time) would care about. I don’t understand the scenario that would pose a problem for the user. The moment some account legitimately gains access to some chat is probably what should trouble you instead.
Sorry I have a hard time understanding the gist of your text. I don’t think it’s viable to be upset about what happens with access that was already acquired previously because that very fact already poses a bigger threat (which might have more to do with the nature of conversations vs how the platform works).
For public chats, you wouldn’t need to approve, only for private chat groups.
I get that but it kind of defeats the purpose. If your group is so small that it’s worth it for every member to approve new ones then it probably doesn’t produce enough content for each new member to care about.
Whenever a user adds a new client (device), all conversations recipients should have to approve in order for them to see the chat history.
Why though? In case of a public chat or a chat with at least few dozens of users it’ll already be excessive if it could work at all.
All chat history and groups are peer 2 peer
Like really P2P or E2E? Because I know at least one chat app that is serverless but doesn’t involve E2E apparently - tox. E2E is an overkill for big group chats because it means you have to re-encrypt every message for every new user for them to see it. Else if you rely on just a fixed shared key it’s not E2E anymore (which will make some people sad and hate your app).
Telegram did have enough time to implement a server based e2e 0 knowledge encryption protocol though, it’s not really rocket science at this point.
What do you mean by server based e2e? From what I get, most people’s complain is that Telegram doesn’t support e2e in group chats, and that is what seems to be close to rocket science in my opinion. Also Telegram is historically filled with ever growing group chats, which means quite serious implications for server requirements from what I understand.
I think not.