6 ms·
That's such a bad take it's not even funny. An asset like Telegram works best if it pretends to be neutral and only leaks information to one side of the conflic
by throwmeariver1 5y ago
That's such a bad take it's not even funny.
An asset like Telegram works best if it pretends to be neutral and only leaks information to one side of the conflict.
- szszrk 5y agoBut does it leak? Is it any different than any other social network? It's well known that big networks simply sell your data if you pay handsomely. Facebook does that on a large scale, even including partial messages content. Heck, it was recently confirmed that Messenger was used to coordinate Chechen's attack recently. Does it make FB compromised by Russia? How one even compare these networks? Why don't you call Messenger an asset? Or google maps after recent revelations (that may as well be bullshit) that it was used to coordinate bombings?
- throwmeariver1 5y agoEverything centralized is a potential intelligence asset it's for you to decide whom you are willing to potentially give your data to. For the leaking part with not encrypting all private messages and no encryption support for group messages everything screams for a oops didn't meant to scenario. Software problems or hacking it will read: "We couldn't have done anything, sorry. Next time just enable encryption mhmkay?"
- szszrk 5y agoAll you say is true, although here a "leak" was meant as a leak of information to foreign government to be used as intelligence.