2 ms·
>A little loss of privacy seemed easy to accept (for an American audience in particular) in exchange for a new crop of emojis This reminds me of when the Rust
by ubercow13 7y ago
>A little loss of privacy seemed easy to accept (for an American audience in particular) in exchange for a new crop of emojis
This reminds me of when the Rust developers dropped IRC for Discord
- microcolonel 7y agoA developer IM channel for a public open source project is not private in any sense.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- woodruffw 7y agoI'm guessing 'ubercow13 is referring to the tracking and analytics that Discord can do, not the fact that the channel (wherever it's hosted) is visible to the public. The former seems like a legitimate privacy concern.
- ubercow13 7y agoSure, but Discord may insist on collecting your phone number before you can use it, amongst other anti-privacy behaviours
- microcolonel 7y agoDiscord does not insist on these things. Discord knows the email address I gave them and that's about it for mandatory information. They could eventually ask for these things, sure; but they do not right now.
- ubercow13 7y agoWell, they do for me.
- ajross 7y agoPrivate side conversations are, though. Maybe you know someone you need to discuss something important with, but you can only remember how to find them on the Rust Discord (or wherever). Network effects are a real thing. A world in which only privacy nuts use IRC[1] is one in which no one has effective access to those tools. [1] Which, OK, for technical reasons is a really bad example for the issue of privacy specifically. But the point is general.