3 ms·

> used by nobody I use it, so it isn't nobody. > not implemented by apps It's implemented by the Android and iOS apps, which are the most used ones. > activ

• ryanlol 9y ago
  https://telegram.org/faq#q-how-secure-is-telegram https://telegram.org/faq#q-how-secure-is-telegram >Telegram is more secure than mass market messengers like WhatsApp and Line Why are you defending these fraudsters? >I use it, so it isn't nobody. Don't play silly word games, you just said "I would guess that usage is definitely below 1%" >It's implemented by the Android and iOS apps, which are the most used ones. Ah, so it'll only fail to work 30% of the time? That's not terrible UX at all. >How is this actively discouraging? Why do you have to press a button to chat securely, when the "less secure" WhatsApp does not require that? Is it because of Durovs superior encryption technology? You simply can't justify that button.
  • jhasse 9y ago
    > Why are you defending these fraudsters? Them being fraudsters doesn't make all of your allegations true. > Don't play silly word games, you just said "I would guess that usage is definitely below 1%" So? 0.1% is below 1% and would still correspend to ~200000 users. That is NOT nobody. > Ah, so it'll only fail to work 30% of the time? That's not terrible UX at all. Source for the 30%? > Why do you have to press a button to chat securely, when the "less secure" WhatsApp does not require that? It's a trade-off. WhatsApp / Telegram's secure-chats are lacking other features Telegram's non-secure chats have.