5 ms·

There’s something particularly paternalistic about this statement from the PM: “Your personal messages, calls and statuses, they will remain end-to-end encrypte

There’s something particularly paternalistic about this statement from the PM: “Your personal messages, calls and statuses, they will remain end-to-end encrypted”.

blitzar 1y ago
Any man who must say, "I am the King", is no true king. Any tech company who must say, "we don't harvest your information", is a tech company that harvests your information.
- gruez 1y ago
  Signal also claims the same: > We can't read your messages or listen to your calls, and no one else can either. Should we be suspicious of Signal as well?
  - andreyf 1y ago
    That's not the same thing at all. Especially as LLM's get smaller, WhatsApp can make a lot of money reading your messages and listening to your calls on the endpoint in order to market segment your ads while remaining e2e encrypted.
  - 7373737373 1y ago
    Yes
  - selfhoster11 1y ago
    Signal isn't backed by a global data gathering conglomerate, so no.
    - gruez 1y ago
      You're right, they're funded by something far more sinister - the US government. More to the point, I thought the principle was "Any man who must say, "I am the King", is no true king."? That seems to leave no room for hedging, like only distrusting "global data gathering conglomerate" or whatever. If you're have to do a holistic assessment of an organization's governance structure and incentives, you're basically admitting that witty one-liners like the above are pointless, which was my point.
      - worik 1y ago
        > they're funded by something far more sinister - the US government. What does that mean?
  - Krasnol 1y ago
    Sure you should be suspicious. You should always be suspicious. Especially if it's free. And you can do something to calm your suspicions. Like checking out Signlas Open Source code.
    - gruez 1y ago
      >Like checking out Signlas Open Source code. What's preventing them from serving a backdoored version? xz was open source as well, that didn't stop the backdoor. There might be reproducible builds on android, but you can't even inspect the executable on iOS without jailbreaking.
      - cherryteastain 1y ago
        You can instead install a FOSS fork of Signal like Molly [1] built by F-Droid directly from the source code [1] https://molly.im/ https://molly.im/
        Tijdreiziger 1y ago
        Isn’t that against Signal’s terms of service? Won’t they ban you?
        sneak 1y ago
        It is neither against the signal software’s license, nor it is against the signal service’s terms of service. This is a false meme spread because the Signal founder (who is no longer with the company) didn’t like people making forks without changing the API server URL and running their own servers. Open source software doesn’t work like that, however.
        deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
        Tijdreiziger 1y ago
        Whether they’re open source doesn’t matter (for this question). They control (their instance of) the server. As you say, I do remember them issuing some threats about it, so it would be interesting to know if they’ve changed their stance on this. (Discord, as an example, has banned users for using alternative clients.)
  - blitzar 1y ago
    Yes, in proportion to the number of times they bring it up in a conversation.
paxys 1y ago
Every time I read such a statment I mentally add "for now" at the end.
rchaud 1y ago
US TV channels are inundated with Whatsapp ads claiming the same. Not surprising considering that it's been considered the "foreigners" messaging app for a long time, and the US government is now doing its very best to make them feel completely unwelcome.
signal11 1y ago
The key in that statement is “personal”. WhatsApp already has “ads in the chat list”, aka messages from businesses that have your details. Rolled out in Asia first, and now in Europe. WhatsApp allows you to opt out of each sender. No way to opt out of all business messaging. Messages from businesses are absolutely not private.

There’s something particularly paternalistic about this statement from the PM: “Your personal messages, calls and statuses, they will remain end-to-end encrypted”.

blitzar 1y ago

Any man who must say, "I am the King", is no true king. Any tech company who must say, "we don't harvest your information", is a tech company that harvests your information.

gruez 1y ago
Signal also claims the same: > We can't read your messages or listen to your calls, and no one else can either. Should we be suspicious of Signal as well?
- andreyf 1y ago
  That's not the same thing at all. Especially as LLM's get smaller, WhatsApp can make a lot of money reading your messages and listening to your calls on the endpoint in order to market segment your ads while remaining e2e encrypted.
- 7373737373 1y ago
  Yes
- selfhoster11 1y ago
  Signal isn't backed by a global data gathering conglomerate, so no.
  - gruez 1y ago
    You're right, they're funded by something far more sinister - the US government. More to the point, I thought the principle was "Any man who must say, "I am the King", is no true king."? That seems to leave no room for hedging, like only distrusting "global data gathering conglomerate" or whatever. If you're have to do a holistic assessment of an organization's governance structure and incentives, you're basically admitting that witty one-liners like the above are pointless, which was my point.
    - worik 1y ago
      > they're funded by something far more sinister - the US government. What does that mean?
- Krasnol 1y ago
  Sure you should be suspicious. You should always be suspicious. Especially if it's free. And you can do something to calm your suspicions. Like checking out Signlas Open Source code.
  - gruez 1y ago
    >Like checking out Signlas Open Source code. What's preventing them from serving a backdoored version? xz was open source as well, that didn't stop the backdoor. There might be reproducible builds on android, but you can't even inspect the executable on iOS without jailbreaking.
    - cherryteastain 1y ago
      You can instead install a FOSS fork of Signal like Molly [1] built by F-Droid directly from the source code [1] https://molly.im/ https://molly.im/
      - Tijdreiziger 1y ago
        Isn’t that against Signal’s terms of service? Won’t they ban you?
        sneak 1y ago
        It is neither against the signal software’s license, nor it is against the signal service’s terms of service. This is a false meme spread because the Signal founder (who is no longer with the company) didn’t like people making forks without changing the API server URL and running their own servers. Open source software doesn’t work like that, however.
        deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
        Tijdreiziger 1y ago
        Whether they’re open source doesn’t matter (for this question). They control (their instance of) the server. As you say, I do remember them issuing some threats about it, so it would be interesting to know if they’ve changed their stance on this. (Discord, as an example, has banned users for using alternative clients.)
- blitzar 1y ago
  Yes, in proportion to the number of times they bring it up in a conversation.

paxys 1y ago

Every time I read such a statment I mentally add "for now" at the end.

rchaud 1y ago

US TV channels are inundated with Whatsapp ads claiming the same. Not surprising considering that it's been considered the "foreigners" messaging app for a long time, and the US government is now doing its very best to make them feel completely unwelcome.

signal11 1y ago

The key in that statement is “personal”. WhatsApp already has “ads in the chat list”, aka messages from businesses that have your details. Rolled out in Asia first, and now in Europe. WhatsApp allows you to opt out of each sender. No way to opt out of all business messaging. Messages from businesses are absolutely not private.