| A bit like @newscracker, I'm on the lookout for a messaging app that works for me. @motohagiography addresses the privacy claims by asking good privacy for what. I've discussed nothing on a conf/video call or exchanged messages that are so sensitive as to absolutely require encryption. There are no absolutes in security anyway. Sorry, but I'm sublimely unparanoid at my national government reading my emails. While I could probably be accused of being a member of the metropolitan elite (c.f. suburban-bourgeoise), I've never said in real life or written online anything to threaten anyone. Instead, @Barrin92 argues that the concern is leakage to allow corporate use of that data. I agree with the concern, but contend that regulation is the answer. I don't believe I've received targeted ads based on the content of my inbox, yet my inbox arrives over unencrypted SMTP. A special case can't be claimed for messaging. The problem isn't weak regulation, the problem is that messaging apps are largely in the hands of few -- and not interoperable. Jabber and SIP aren't in the hands of a single company and for me, the direction of travel has to be federated across autonomous providers along the lines of interoperability. I haven't tackled any of my acquaintances about it but suspect that the remainers from the defection from WhatsApp that Facebook provoked include a fair number that take a "out of the frying-pan and into the fire" or "better the devil you know" stance moreso than inertia. There isn't money in it in the sense of the unwelcome TeleGuard HN spam. But, rather than banging-on about encryption, espionage, and elites, what those with the resources need to do is to use them to help democratise messaging. |