7 ms·

If a friend of yours authorized access to their messages, then the app would have access to your private messages with that friend.

downandout 9y ago
Only in the same way that apps that you authorize to work through Gmail also have access to your emails with other people. I just don’t see an issue here. The messages permission required explicit, separate consent from other permissions. There is not a single user that could argue that they didn’t understand that specific aspect of this app. This story is just a grab at clicks.
- tzakrajs 9y ago
  If we have a private conversation, you shouldn't have the right to reproduce the contents of my contributions to the conversation.
  - downandout 9y ago
    Then you better go protest at Google's offices, because Gmail allows apps to interact with your email too.
    - propogandist 9y ago
      by using Gmail, you are allowing Google to scrape what might otherwise be private messages
      - tzakrajs 9y ago
        Indeed, and I am going to stop using Gmail as a result of this thread.
        propogandist 9y ago
        not sure if you're being sarcastic, but you really should. Everyone should. It will cost about $5/mo [fastmail] to make it happen, unfortunately most people don't seem to assign much value to privacy.
  - paxys 9y ago
    You are the one who put it in their phone/inbox in the first place. You can argue about copyright laws or NDAs, but otherwise "private conversation" means nothing.
    - vkou 9y ago
      One-party recordings are illegal in many states. Just because I unicast some information something does not always give you the right to retain a record of it.
      - paxys 9y ago
        Recording laws are for phone calls. How would you even apply them to emails or texts?
- musage 9y ago
  > Only in the same way that apps that you authorize to work through Gmail also have access to your emails with other people. "only"? What does that even mean in this context? > I just don’t see an issue here. Maybe write out your thought process instead of just a conclusion with no path from here to there.

downandout 9y ago

Only in the same way that apps that you authorize to work through Gmail also have access to your emails with other people. I just don’t see an issue here. The messages permission required explicit, separate consent from other permissions. There is not a single user that could argue that they didn’t understand that specific aspect of this app. This story is just a grab at clicks.

tzakrajs 9y ago
If we have a private conversation, you shouldn't have the right to reproduce the contents of my contributions to the conversation.
- downandout 9y ago
  Then you better go protest at Google's offices, because Gmail allows apps to interact with your email too.
  - propogandist 9y ago
    by using Gmail, you are allowing Google to scrape what might otherwise be private messages
    - tzakrajs 9y ago
      Indeed, and I am going to stop using Gmail as a result of this thread.
      - propogandist 9y ago
        not sure if you're being sarcastic, but you really should. Everyone should. It will cost about $5/mo [fastmail] to make it happen, unfortunately most people don't seem to assign much value to privacy.
- paxys 9y ago
  You are the one who put it in their phone/inbox in the first place. You can argue about copyright laws or NDAs, but otherwise "private conversation" means nothing.
  - vkou 9y ago
    One-party recordings are illegal in many states. Just because I unicast some information something does not always give you the right to retain a record of it.
    - paxys 9y ago
      Recording laws are for phone calls. How would you even apply them to emails or texts?
musage 9y ago
> Only in the same way that apps that you authorize to work through Gmail also have access to your emails with other people. "only"? What does that even mean in this context? > I just don’t see an issue here. Maybe write out your thought process instead of just a conclusion with no path from here to there.