[ricardobayes]

iMessage and iPhones being 'more secure' is simply not true. I know it's being thrown around a lot, but e.g. Pegasus famously had zero-click exploits for iMessage.

[easrng]

iMessage is (at least somewhat) end to end encrypted and SMS is not.

[adlpz]

SMS is very uncommon in much of Europe.

I'm feeling you are assuming that the alternative to iMessages in Europe is SMS. It's not. The alternative is WhatsApp, Telegram, Signal, Facebook Messenger, etc.

[easrng]

Signal > WhatsApp > iMessage > Telegram > Facebook Messenger > SMS

[aendruk]

Is this how you estimate people in Europe do rank alternatives, or just how you think they should?

[easrng]

That's just how I rank alternatives.

[gruez]

>WhatsApp > ... > Facebook Messenger

why? They're both end to end encrypted but owned by meta.

[aendruk]

Signal, WhatsApp, and iMessage frame privacy from the service operator as the norm, while the others relegate it to some “I’m being sneaky now” switch.

Framing fundamental privacy measures as sneaky mode is actively harmful to their broader adoption, paints a target on the few people who do have dire need for protection, and makes us all vulnerable to efforts to legislate against what progress we’ve made.

[vetinari]

> Signal, WhatsApp, and iMessage make E2EE the norm

E2E. yes; explicit key management, no.

So basically you are getting encryption on your device, but do not know, who can decrypt.

About the only messaging app that makes some effort on key verification and keys cannot be changed randomly is Threema.