4 ms·
I'll have my 70 year old parents on another continent install counterstrike so we can text each other. Thanks for the suggestion.
by ubercore 4y ago
I'll have my 70 year old parents on another continent install counterstrike so we can text each other. Thanks for the suggestion.
- stiray 4y agoYour 70 year old parents don't care about security of communication. Whatever http(without 's') chat is quite enough for them. They were talking on analog, unencrypted line for whole their life. Why should they care now? PRISM anyone ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM )?
- pwinnski 4y agoAre you suggesting that people who aren't devoted to the cause of secure communication are not allowed to derive any benefits from secure communication?
- mullen 4y agoThat is also not true either. My 80 year old mother uses Signal because she talks property management and money related issues to people. She does not trust WhatsApp because it is owned by Facebook (Which is weird because she uses Facebook all the time). For her, knowing that cell phone company employees can grab text messages is enough for her to switch to something that is secure.
- Cederfjard 4y agoSo this is the crux of the disagreement. You believe that you either need maximum possible security or none at all, so when you need to be secure, it doesn’t matter if you have to use an inconvenient solution, because it’s that important. Whereas in reality there are a ton of less severe threat models that can be countered with more user-friendly methods of communication. Advertising companies, ISPs, local cops, etc won’t be able to read your Signal messages or find out who you’ve been talking to, and that can be important to many people. NSA or equivalent probably can, if they’re interested in you already, but that’s a concern for far less.