[NayamAmarshe]

Yeah, I totally understand your point. I had to be the stubborn one to leave WhatsApp and refuse any communication unless they contact me on Telegram.

Some didn't like it at first, but thankfully most of them now love Telegram. I have a “My way or the highway” kinda attitude when it comes to WhatsApp, it has certainly caused problems once or twice, but I'm very firm on my stance against Facebook apps.

[duud]

How is Telegram more privacy preserving than WhatsApp?

[NayamAmarshe]

Because it is, if you read about it.

Their track record is excellent. Pavel moved away from Russia (and his team of 20 something members too!) only because the Russian government pressured them into giving access to their servers.

WhatsApp is anything but privacy preserving. You have 0 transparency. You can't even prove if the E2EE exists for 100% of the time or just 50% of the time because the binaries are obfuscated. On top of that, their privacy policy and being owned by Facebook says everything one needs to know.

Telegram, IMHO, is the only app that does not compromise on user experience and still provides fantastic privacy control and respects the user data. Sure, it's not E2EE, but no E2EE app can ever do what Telegram is doing at this scale.

[tcfhgj]

It isn't. It creates massive barriers for using e2ee

[NayamAmarshe]

I get where you're coming from but Telegram is objectively better than WhatsApp due to several reasons:

- Privacy controls for each user.

- No hard requirement for a phone number.

- Cloud encryption.

- Open Source clients.

- Telegram's track record.

- Business model not revolving around selling user data.

WhatsApp is a black box and nobody has any good arguments for it other than 'supposed' E2EE that nobody knows anything about. The fact that WhatsApp's T&C forbid you from even reverse engineering the obfuscated binaries and Facebook being the force behind WhatsApp, I'm still surprised that people take their E2EE claim seriously.

It's like me promising you that I'm not looking at you, while I stand facing you, right behind you.

[tcfhgj]

> - No hard requirement for a phone number

Only if you pay

> - Open Source clients.

Mautrix/WhatsApp

> - Telegram's track record

Which is?

> WhatsApp is a black box and nobody has any good arguments for it other than 'supposed' E2EE that nobody knows anything about.

With Telegram you have a guarantee that it is not E2EE in group chats and single chats if you don't opt into a way worse UX/features.

> - Business model not revolving around selling user data.

True for Whatsapp as well, it's funded by business accounts and perhaps other parts of facebook

[NayamAmarshe]

> Mautrix/WhatsApp

I'm sorry, but that's not a good example. It doesn't even count as a legitimate client.

> Which is?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blocking_of_Telegram_in_Russia

https://hongkongfp.com/2020/07/05/exclusive-telegram-to-temp...

https://www.vice.com/en/article/a3yavb/russia-blocks-telegra...

https://sensortower.com/blog/hong-kong-protests-app-download...

> With Telegram you have a guarantee that it is not E2EE in group chats and single chats if you don't opt into a way worse UX/features.

You're saying this as if you have a guarantee that WhatsApp's E2EE is 100% correct. At least with Telegram, I know what data the app is collecting, where it's going and how it's being stored on the device.

> True for Whatsapp as well, it's funded by business accounts and perhaps other parts of facebook

Assumption again.

[tcfhgj]

> I'm sorry, but that's not a good example. It doesn't even count as a legitimate client.

why not? After all the client uses the multi-device API like the official client does

> You're saying this as if you have a guarantee that WhatsApp's E2EE is 100% correct.

I am not saying it like that. I am explicitly saying that with Telegram you have the guarantee that it is not E2EE, while there at least exist the possibility of WhatsApp being E2EE.

> Assumption again.

An observation, not assumption. WhatsApp wants to see money for business accounts: https://business.whatsapp.com/products/platform-pricing

[jen20]

I do wonder about that: moving from WhatsApp to Telegram appears to be a case of moving from the frying pan into the fire. To Signal seems somewhere more reasonable.

[pleb_nz]

I would say from the frying pan into the kitchen bench. It's not perfect but it's not yet being cooked.

Telegram is a good compromise. Yeah it's not e2ee.

Signal isn't even a good compromise for most people. I don't know anyone who has stuck with signal in my circles. They've nearly all reverted back their previous service or find a new one.

Personally I treat everything that is sent over networks as public data. So I would never comm anything that needed e2ee via a message service full stop.

[jen20]

> Telegram is a good compromise. Yeah it's not e2ee.

That does not sound like a good compromise to me.

[pleb_nz]

To you maybe, to lots of people it is.

I wouldn't use a messaging app to send encrypted content in the first place. But I do want trusted privacy control which telegram provides

[NayamAmarshe]

I don't think Signal has what it takes to combat Facebook's monopoly. It's more inconvenient than WhatsApp, why would people even switch?

Telegram on the other hand does not compromise on features and user experience and still is able to deliver a system that doesn't disrespect the user data.

[jen20]

I perhaps don't know what I'm missing with WhatsApp, but I use Signal with Android-owning friends (iMessage for everyone else), and no-one has voiced displeasure - indeed it was _suggested_ by many of them, both technical and non-technical as preferable to SMS, so I don't think it can be that bad.

I don't have special insight into either WhatsApp or Telegram, but I think given the founders and jurisdictions in which they operate, Telegram deserves at least the same level of scepticism and scrutiny as TikTok.

[NayamAmarshe]

You'll find this interesting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blocking_Telegram_in_Russia

I don't think Telegram deserves scrutiny. Not after what they've been able to accomplish and follow.

> indeed it was _suggested_ by many of them, both technical and non-technical as preferable to SMS, so I don't think it can be that bad.

It's not bad of course, but it's extremely hard to get WhatsApp users to switch to Signal than Telegram. Both because of missing WhatsApp features in Signal and the additional hoops like PIN.

I'm Just speaking from personal experience. Signal was also my first choice.

[jen20]

> I don't think Telegram deserves scrutiny.

Every communication channel deserves scrutiny according to the threat model of a given user.

[geraldhh]

it's not embedded within the us data industrial complex (meta, alphabet)

[mhoad]

It’s a British Virgin Islands registered company run by a Russian billionaire who lives in Dubai.

[ghaff]

It depends where you live.

In the US, I don't have Telegram and it's been ages since I sent a message on WhatsApp. Everyone I know just uses SMS.