5 ms·

> Telegram is the most popular messaging app in Iran and Uzbekistan [1] > Telegram’s largest market is India, which accounts for more than 20% of its userbase.

> Telegram is the most popular messaging app in Iran and Uzbekistan [1] > Telegram’s largest market is India, which accounts for more than 20% of its userbase. Telegram also has a large amount of users in countries with heavy censorship and surveillance, such as Iran, Russia, and Uzbekistan. [1] > Percentage of users via region: Asia 38%, Europe 27%, Latin America 21%, MEMA 8% [1] It sure is valuable data - if you are a three letter agency. Not sure if it's valuable business data. [1] https://www.businessofapps.com/data/telegram-statistics/ https://www.businessofapps.com/data/telegram-statistics/

alterom 1y ago
[flagged]
- CaramelRaisins 1y ago
  How many times are you going to repost this?
  - alterom 1y ago
    [flagged]
troupo 1y ago
Unfortunately it's also the most sleek and feature-rich messenger of them all :(
- drdaeman 1y ago
  It sort of used to be, although not exactly as a messenger - it was never good for one-to-one private conversations, but as a social network with channels and groups. However, for the last couple years enshittification is in progress - it's not at Microsoft Teams levels yet, but they're really trying to get there, shoving more and more ads (third- and first-party both) into users' faces with increasing frequency.
  - greenavocado 1y ago
    The main Telegram enshittification is caused by spammers and scammers. They purchase lots of Telegram Premium credits and proceed to spam the hell out of users and they get away with it. Telegram Premium users are treated much more leniently than regular users when it comes to moderation affairs.
  - int_19h 1y ago
    Since the protocol is actually open, you don't have to use the official client. I'm curious as to why you say it was "never good for one-to-one private conversations". I've been using it for this exact thing for many years, and still find it the best option currently on the market for a variety of reasons (e.g. unlike Signal it doesn't limit the number of devices which are linked to the same account).
    - jazzyjackson 1y ago
      I wasn't a telegram user for long so this may have changed but isn't the secret chat limited to device to device? So messages sent from my phone can't be decrypted by the same user account on my laptop? I just remember thinking, well this is dumb, and going back to Signal (Signal annoys me in other ways, requiring a single phone to be the "master" and other devices to be merely linked. I miss keybase, they had a great system including paper backups)
  - distances 1y ago
    What ads is Telegram showing? I can't think of any, except a peristent birthday reminder. I also agree with the sibling comment that Telegram is sadly the best chat app I've used not only for group chats but also for 1-to-1 chats. Edit: there are paid emojis or stickers too, now that I think about it.
    - thunderfork 1y ago
      [dead]
    - codedokode 1y ago
- acjohnson55 1y ago
  I agree. I need to migrate off, but I haven't figured out where to yet.
sorokod 1y ago
> Telegram also has a large amount of users in countries with heavy censorship and surveillance That citizens of those countries are allowed to use Telegram says something about the privacy it affords to them.
- tdiff 1y ago
  Its well known that whatsapp is also available in Russia
- machomaster 1y ago
  You don't know what you are talking about. Read on the multi-year attempts of Putin trying to ban Telegram and Telegram fighting back (technologically and also politically - demonstrations, etc). Telegram won the battle and Putin had no choice but to admit defeat. Similar things happened in other non-free coutries as well.
  - nickpsecurity 1y ago
    I'll warn that the FBI was publicly trying to get warrants for information while they and NSA were siphoning it off in secret from the same companies. One was likely a cover for the other. Unless there's legal protections, assume in your threat model any company has let their host government, maybe others, backdoor their offerings. It might have been willingly or forced. Police states like U.S. and Russia should be assumed to subvert any pprovider. If they don't like that, they need to repeal the Patriot Act, ban requiring companies to attach black boxes to their internal systems, give companies immunity for publicly talking about court orders, require companies to disclose what data they give to the government, and let individuals know what was ordered after a period of time. Then, I might trust statements about what they do or don't share. Also, if these bother you, try not to commit crimes.
    - bigfatkitten 1y ago
      > I'll warn that the FBI was publicly trying to get warrants for information while they and NSA were siphoning it off in secret from the same companies. One was likely a cover for the other That’s a wildly ignorant take, but it makes for a nice conspiracy theory if you make no effort at all to understand the legalities. Different warrants authorise the collection and use of information for different purposes. FAA 702 warrants only authorise targeting non U.S. persons outside the United States for foreign intelligence purposes, where there is probable cause to believe the U.S. person is a foreign power or is an officer, employee, or agent of a foreign power. The FBI has criminal investigation and counterterrorism functions which relate to persons in the U.S. and/or where there is no connection to a foreign power. They obviously need different warrants to authorize those activities.

alterom 1y ago

[flagged]

CaramelRaisins 1y ago
How many times are you going to repost this?
- alterom 1y ago
  [flagged]

troupo 1y ago

Unfortunately it's also the most sleek and feature-rich messenger of them all :(

drdaeman 1y ago
It sort of used to be, although not exactly as a messenger - it was never good for one-to-one private conversations, but as a social network with channels and groups. However, for the last couple years enshittification is in progress - it's not at Microsoft Teams levels yet, but they're really trying to get there, shoving more and more ads (third- and first-party both) into users' faces with increasing frequency.
- greenavocado 1y ago
  The main Telegram enshittification is caused by spammers and scammers. They purchase lots of Telegram Premium credits and proceed to spam the hell out of users and they get away with it. Telegram Premium users are treated much more leniently than regular users when it comes to moderation affairs.
- int_19h 1y ago
  Since the protocol is actually open, you don't have to use the official client. I'm curious as to why you say it was "never good for one-to-one private conversations". I've been using it for this exact thing for many years, and still find it the best option currently on the market for a variety of reasons (e.g. unlike Signal it doesn't limit the number of devices which are linked to the same account).
  - jazzyjackson 1y ago
    I wasn't a telegram user for long so this may have changed but isn't the secret chat limited to device to device? So messages sent from my phone can't be decrypted by the same user account on my laptop? I just remember thinking, well this is dumb, and going back to Signal (Signal annoys me in other ways, requiring a single phone to be the "master" and other devices to be merely linked. I miss keybase, they had a great system including paper backups)
- distances 1y ago
  What ads is Telegram showing? I can't think of any, except a peristent birthday reminder. I also agree with the sibling comment that Telegram is sadly the best chat app I've used not only for group chats but also for 1-to-1 chats. Edit: there are paid emojis or stickers too, now that I think about it.
  - thunderfork 1y ago
    [dead]
  - codedokode 1y ago
acjohnson55 1y ago
I agree. I need to migrate off, but I haven't figured out where to yet.

sorokod 1y ago

> Telegram also has a large amount of users in countries with heavy censorship and surveillance That citizens of those countries are allowed to use Telegram says something about the privacy it affords to them.

tdiff 1y ago
Its well known that whatsapp is also available in Russia
machomaster 1y ago
You don't know what you are talking about. Read on the multi-year attempts of Putin trying to ban Telegram and Telegram fighting back (technologically and also politically - demonstrations, etc). Telegram won the battle and Putin had no choice but to admit defeat. Similar things happened in other non-free coutries as well.
- nickpsecurity 1y ago
  I'll warn that the FBI was publicly trying to get warrants for information while they and NSA were siphoning it off in secret from the same companies. One was likely a cover for the other. Unless there's legal protections, assume in your threat model any company has let their host government, maybe others, backdoor their offerings. It might have been willingly or forced. Police states like U.S. and Russia should be assumed to subvert any pprovider. If they don't like that, they need to repeal the Patriot Act, ban requiring companies to attach black boxes to their internal systems, give companies immunity for publicly talking about court orders, require companies to disclose what data they give to the government, and let individuals know what was ordered after a period of time. Then, I might trust statements about what they do or don't share. Also, if these bother you, try not to commit crimes.
  - bigfatkitten 1y ago
    > I'll warn that the FBI was publicly trying to get warrants for information while they and NSA were siphoning it off in secret from the same companies. One was likely a cover for the other That’s a wildly ignorant take, but it makes for a nice conspiracy theory if you make no effort at all to understand the legalities. Different warrants authorise the collection and use of information for different purposes. FAA 702 warrants only authorise targeting non U.S. persons outside the United States for foreign intelligence purposes, where there is probable cause to believe the U.S. person is a foreign power or is an officer, employee, or agent of a foreign power. The FBI has criminal investigation and counterterrorism functions which relate to persons in the U.S. and/or where there is no connection to a foreign power. They obviously need different warrants to authorize those activities.