3 ms·
>Another response I usually see is “But Signal is all we have!”. While that is somewhat true — at least by the metric of “secure messengers your granny can use”
by busythrowaway22 6y ago
>Another response I usually see is “But Signal is all we have!”. While that is somewhat true — at least by the metric of “secure messengers your granny can use”, there are some promising alternatives who are especially focused on decentralizing E2EE communications.
So the author readily admits that these alternatives aren't actually good enough for the average user.
Newsflash: This IS for the average user! This is for my grandma and my cousins overseas who don't know anything about the internet! They don't know anything about "cryptoshit" or what "E2EE" stands for. Once you actually have something worthwhile that my grandma can use, then maybe you can claim it's better!
- jeltz 6y agoIf the average user was fine with the terrible clients which are Skype, Whatsapp and Facebook Messenger why should we hold Element to a higher standard?
- perardi 6y agoDefine terrible. Oh, I’ll grant you the UI of these clients can be terrible. Facebook Messenger takes a shocking amount of resources. But what’s the job to be done for most people? Chatting with friends. FB Messenger has the network effect built in. You can just message your friends. And send them goofy stickers. What will get people to transition to an encrypted messenger where they have to duplicate their social network? Privacy? Yeah, OK, I am definitely going to get a friend to download a new app, create a new account, and go through whatever dance is necessary for encryption to ask if we want Mexican or Thai for dinner.
- akvadrako 6y agoPersonally I think element has a ways to go before it reaches the user friendlyness of even skype, the worst of those three. The iOS app is a the most confusing chat app I've tried, especially if you run your own identity server.