5 ms·

Why so smug? I've seen this attitude in all types of IT heads (sys admins easily being the worst of the bunch) over the years. What is it about techies that the

• sheepz 13y ago
  This has nothing to do with smugness. If you market your product as a secure alternative, it better be secure.
  • igravious 13y ago
    I understand the importance of security. I do hope Telegram can get it right. I acknowledge it is probably not as secure as they claim right now. I still maintain the article author's attitude just rubs me up the wrong way because of the mood I'm in - the smugness (and I hope I'm not imagining it) is definitely a side issue but one I felt I had to get off my chest. I don't want to make a big issue of it and detract too much from the critique but I felt I had to say it even though HN may not be the bestest place in the world to voice such things. I hear you though.
    • MichaelGG 13y ago
      Given their attitude, it's unlikely they'll get it right. They'll keep telling people "that's not a real attack" and making up excuses. Then someone will publish a real attack, and they'll patch over it. Repeat. The "smugness" is pointing out problems in their implementation, despite them going on about having "ACM champions" that took two years to design it, so it obviously must be perfect. If someone pitched a database that simply mmap'd a file and then called it "fully transactional and safe", they'd get a lot of strong criticism.
      • h0cked 13y ago
        I am with you. ACM Champions mean a shit to me, and I have enough publications in crypto and secure communication to claim that I am a ACM Champion, and BTW I have a PHD actually related to security and crypto. But, NONE of my credentials is a valid argument about how secure my protocols are. This kind of attitude (trust us, we have enough credentials to show) seems to be a universal problem with people in academics. Come on, don't do this. We all get the sense that you have to bluff to get your paper published, but this is not going to work for a product to be accepted.
• nwh 13y ago
  The issue is that they claim their system is secure. Peoples lives can literally depend on encryption actually doing what it says on the tin; this software does not. It's the epitome of home grown encryption.
  • igravious 13y ago
    I hear you. Agreed. Surely every decent crypto system started off home-grown?
    • wmf 13y ago
      Sure, in the old days someone had to be the first to invent stuff. But today when we already have well-reviewed protocols you shouldn't deploy something until after it has survived review.
    • nwh 13y ago
      There's a line with this sort of stuff, and the crossing of it is what I have an issue with. If they presented it as an attempt and asked for critique, then this would have been a fine thing to publish. They would have got chewed out by a professional, fixed it or removed it, and everyone would go away learning something new. The issues comes when they don't accept critique, and make claims that don't stack up in actuality. Doing that is how people get hurt.
      • smacktoward 13y ago
        Exactly. Being wrong is fine. Being stubbornly wrong is not.
  • deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
• collinvandyck76 13y ago
  In general, it's largely due to insecurity. I'm not saying that this is the case here, as I didn't pick up on it, but your comment definitely resonated with me, and this is something that bugs me more than I'd like on an ongoing basis. Over the last few years, I've been trying to become better at saying "I don't know", which can sometimes be really difficult in some tech circles.
  • igravious 13y ago
    I have never used Node.js There, I said it.
    • igravious 13y ago
      Heyyy, it was a joke! Cut me some slack. I did have to install _Node_ to get at _npm_ to get at _bower_ to install _bootstrap_ in a _Rails_ app so can we say I've used it by proxy? :)
• fleitz 13y ago
  They did what pretty much everyone tells people not to do. The fact that they hired experts to make rookie mistakes is just beyond belief. It's like a pro painter who covers the walls in oil before putting a coat of latex on, then goes and tells the world he's discovered a way to make paint stick indefinitely to walls, then a week later the paint peels right off.
• MichaelGG 13y ago
  Because Telegram is acting careless, and ignoring actual criticism, while touting claims that do not appear to be true? It's close to lying and scamming users. If Telegram was a messaging proposal, I'm sure the attitude would be a more straightforward one (with the same end result of "you're not ready to handle this yet"). Instead, it's billed as a definitely secure system. Seriously, read the previous thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6913456 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6913456 Look at the threads regarding CryptoCat (which was quite broken, despite the author fighting folks off and people cheering him on), or that guy that insisted he had secure JavaScript crypto that wasn't ultimately as secure as the server.
  • igravious 13y ago
    So which efforts are leading the pack at this stage that I could recommend to my entire family who practically daily urge me to join them on Viber? Years ago I would have said Skype. Now I just don't know. I'm saddened because I thought Telegram looked pretty sweet and a serious new contender. Practically calling them liars after that much hard work is unfair.
    • MichaelGG 13y ago
      How is it unfair? It's essentially factual. They make tons of strange decisions, using things known to be broken, then hand wave over it with "you don't understand" and "ACM champions". Things aren't fair. Hard work does not automatically grant your result any status. You know what's also unfair? Pitching a product that's supposed to do something but doesn't.
    • glomph 13y ago
      TextSecure seems to be pretty popular.
    • neumann 13y ago
      The last thread on this alerted me to https://www.whispersystems.org/ https://www.whispersystems.org/ (also on github https://github.com/WhisperSystems/ https://github.com/WhisperSystems/) Maybe you can try that with your folks on android?
• vacri 13y ago
  Elitism is found in all specialists, not just IT. I've seen it from doctors, mechanics, finance folks, dentists, police, even unskilled jobs like packaging dispatch staff.
  • MichaelGG 13y ago
    If someone started pitching IV Diet Coke as a cure for malaria, they'd deserve the ridicule and "elitism".
• caprad 13y ago
  Did not pick this up as being smug, did pick it up as some guys stepping into a complicated field, and messing it up royally.
• EdwardDiego 13y ago
  > Why so smug? Yeah, the alpha geek passive-aggression is a tiresome aspect of our industry. Usually that smug self-assuredness is worn down by harsh experience, but heaven help you if you meet a 40 year old alpha geek who has not yet learned that they too can be wrong. (I work with one, and he makes some shocking mistakes but cannot admit it, so when he launches at you with a holier-than-thou attitude, scorn and contempt are all that arise). > What happened to good grace and manners Exactly. When you're totally right and someone's totally wrong, if you want to effect actual change (assuming that doing so requires their coöperation), grace is precisely what's required. You can have all the technical correctness in the world behind you, but the moment you put someone's back up with your poor attitude, the chance of them rationally engaging with your argument drops dramatically. I've had this argument before with some people on Reddit, and I received the retort "But who cares if I was rude, _they_ were wrong, I was telling them how to fix it!" ad perpetuam from one particular person who was astounded that no-one took his advice.
• mehwoot 13y ago
  Usually I'd agree with you, but when it comes to offering a service that provides security, it is different. Why? Because with any other service, the people using it are going to be able to judge whether it is effective. If Word crashes when I open it, or is buggy, I'll know that and I can choose to use something else. But with a product that is offering security, there is no way for an "ordinary" end user to know whether it really works or not. As is shown time and time again, providing good security is freakin hard. So you'd better be on your game if you're claiming to provide that. And honestly, if someone is donating their time to check the security of other people's applications, and all they ask in return is to be a little smug when they point out problems, I think that's a fair trade-off.
• hbmnn 13y ago
  If you're advertising, smugly, that your system is secure and you don't hire any cryptographers and roll your own you deserve much worse than a smug debunking. Trying to profit off the whole NSAgate thing this way deserves derision. Provide robust and proven service and don't try to pass off Maths Ph. Ds as cryptographers. This just screams sleazy start-up, because what they're doing, is indeed, sleazy.
• pyduan 13y ago
  I initially had the same reaction as you, but reading the discussion between the author and Telegram in the comments (both on the linked article and the original HN thread) it seems to be this is largely deserved given the way Telegram has been responding. They've essentially refused to justify any any of their (curious) choices and relying on authority arguments instead: > We grew tired of “experts” too lazy to read the full documentation.
• geal 13y ago
  I wrote that article, and I think you are right. That was not the right tone for a review of a new product, even if Telegram's attitude (in particular here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6913456 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6913456 ) has been of denial and arrogance. I usually have no temper problem, but everytime someones proposes a new secure system and ignores the holes people point out, because that means I will need to spend months explaining to pepople that they should not use it, even if it is "hype". So, yes, again, you are right, my apologies.
  • igravious 13y ago
    Hi there geal, Only noticed your reply now, two days late. That apology is big of you. Keep up the good work, you've got tons of visibility - I'd return to your site again, that's for sure - and I'd listen carefully to what you've got to say. doffs cap
• forgottenpass 13y ago
  What is it about techies that they come over so smug when pointing out deficiencies in others? Probably a response to the bold, did-no-wrong, we-worked-hard-and-that-should-count and generally arrogant attitude of the people they're criticizing.