Same with groups related to the Gaza genocide.
This channel can't be displayed because it violated local laws.
this post was submitted on 09 May 2024
185 points (91.1% liked)
Privacy
32023 readers
1148 users here now
A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.
Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.
In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.
Some Rules
- Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn't great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
- Don't promote proprietary software
- Try to keep things on topic
- If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
- Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
- Be nice :)
Related communities
Chat rooms
-
[Matrix/Element]Dead
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Ror this one I think they advertised somewhere that the groups would still be available if you download the apk from their website, I did this and I can still see the hamas group
Hama's has a public telegram channel? That seems like a legal liability
iirc they need to comply with google store policies, but when downloading the apk directly that is not relevant.
Great, I didn't know that. They 'ban' the Russian news channels that way as well.
You know what, in my head I think I want a whole new messenger.
There's an indexer that acts as a phone book, but at the same time, people can bypass that by directly adding contacts.
All chat history and groups are peer 2 peer and are stored like torrents with the extended backup being self-hostable.
Recent chat history (up to 30 days) can be stored on the indexer, though they're encrypted and so the server is blind to what's in them. They should explicitly be opt-in.
Whenever a user adds a new client (device), all conversations recipients should have to approve in order for them to see the chat history.
It should also have all the bells and whistles, like emoji, stickers, groups, channels, etc.
I have been thinking of something like this too, the thing in common between us is that neither of us has the competency, the time and the persistence to make this happen.
Sometimes putting the ideas we have out there makes a difference. While we lack the competency, perhaps someone that sees this will and it will inspire them to bring something to life.
Well, those having the competency have likely already thought of such a thing, and possibly already busy with it.
I'm hopeful for Locutus as a platform for making such applications.
Just seen that they've renamed themselves as Freenet. It's a shame that they're using Reddit rather than Lemmy though.
Whenever a user adds a new client (device), all conversations recipients should have to approve in order for them to see the chat history.
Why though? In case of a public chat or a chat with at least few dozens of users it'll already be excessive if it could work at all.
All chat history and groups are peer 2 peer
Like really P2P or E2E? Because I know at least one chat app that is serverless but doesn't involve E2E apparently - tox. E2E is an overkill for big group chats because it means you have to re-encrypt every message for every new user for them to see it. Else if you rely on just a fixed shared key it's not E2E anymore (which will make some people sad and hate your app).
Why though? In case of a public chat or a chat with at least few dozens of users it'll already be excessive if it could work at all.
For public chats, you wouldn't need to approve, only for private chat groups.
Like really P2P or E2E?
Yep real P2P. The design is inspired by BitTorrent.
For public chats, you wouldn't need to approve, only for private chat groups.
I get that but it kind of defeats the purpose. If your group is so small that it's worth it for every member to approve new ones then it probably doesn't produce enough content for each new member to care about.
See, we're already the Messenger Working Group 😂
What’s wrong with WhatsApp? Is there something I need to know?
It’s owned by Meta/Facebook a company that’s makes its money spying on users. Signal or Simplex Chat are much better choices.
Everything. Why would you trust Meta with anything?
Very true.
It gets worse when you watch his interview with Tucker Carlson .. guy said if a government forces us to censor a group it'll only censored from the app you get from big tech play stores... That's horseshit... If you censor a group from your platform, it'll be removed from all people's feeds regardless of their clients or from where they got the app...
telegram has different visibility based on which client you are using and your phone number's region. I've seen it firsthand how some channels are not available on telegram downloaded from app store vs direct apk download. unless if you mean in spirit they're basically the same which i agree but everyone that has used telegram at all knows that telegram values being accessible more than free speech and privacy.
I've seen it firsthand how some channels are not available on telegram downloaded from app store vs direct apk download
the right word is "visible".. discoverability on Telegram has always being broken, as in you search for a channel, good luck finding it!.. like you said it's because of your phone number region.. Etc... that has been fixed when they introduced similar channels feature, since then I never used that broken search functionality.. But once you find and join a channel, if Telegram mods decided to censor some posts or remove the entire channel, it'll be removed from all clients... unless there is some client out there who saves snapshots of all channels or posts ( somehow )
by available i meant available. it's on a per channel/group basis and not on individual messages but essentially you can't join or view their messages even if you have their id and even if someone forwards it to you it displays a "this message is nor available on clients downloaded from google play" error message or something similar. if you joined a channel prior and it get blocked from your client you stay in but can't view its messages.
That sucks, i don't know if a XMPP client + Tor/Orbot would be a good alternative
Telegram is used like a weird social network with channels and big groupchats and search. XMPP can't do that yet.
Movim is sort of like a decentralized social media space built atop XMPP
You mean, with things similar to TG channels? Will try. Still answering specific messages with referencing them, referencing specific posts in channels and so on don't seem to be in XMPP functionality yet.
I have no idea what channels are… Is this threading?
It's like a blog with comments under every post.
Movim has public posts that can be commented on in a decentralized fashion but can also restrict comments to followers
I thought Telegram was the next big thing as it was secure.
Secure has no meaning.
It never was secure.
I think a huge part of this "enshittification" thing is that companies have finally realized that normies for fucking real don't care what specialists say, like at all, in no situation they care. Between a cryptographer with an ugly photo and a cryptobro with a nice photo they'll listen to the latter.
10 years ago it was more of a compromise, now they realized that you can roll out something as "secure" as OSCAR over TLS to the server and say it's secure and the absolute majority will just believe it if the advertising is good enough, no matter what specialists squeal.
So now people compare Signal to Telegram as if these were comparable.
It really sucks. Such a descent into stupidity and centralism together with AI poisoning just can't avoid making our world more dystopian and genocidal.
According to Telegram.
This is only possible because Telegram is service as a software substitute.