[thisislife2]

The appeal of Telegram over Signal or WhatsApp is that it is not an American or BigTech service. (And, ofcourse, it's really good). Signal is funded by 2 rich American entrepreneurs who made their fortune when their services were acquired by Twitter (TextSecure / RedPhone) and Meta (WhatsApp), respectively. Whether it is indeed altruism behind this, you'll have to judge for yourself ...

[KomoD]

> Signal is funded by 2 rich American entrepreneurs who made their fortune when their services were acquired by Twitter (TextSecure / RedPhone) and Meta (WhatsApp), respectively. Whether it is indeed altruism behind this, you'll have to judge for yourself ...

To be fair, Telegram is funded by billionaire Pavel Durov, co-founder of VK, the most popular social network in Russia and one of the most visited websites in the world.

[jesterson]

Would you explain why "American or BigTech" is worse than some sketchy bro sitting in tax haven?

Would be good if we can compare technologies rather than feelings. I hate what US tech has turned into, but presence of E2EE on whatsapp makes it incredibly way better than telegram to that matter. Even though undoubtedly Meta farms metadata on WA.

[thisislife2]

Ideally, yes, if all else were equal we would only be making a purely technical comparison. But that's not how it works. People also factor in the business model and values of the company before making purchase decisions. (That applies to countries too - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boycotts_of_Israel ). For many of us, Meta and its founders score very low on the "trustworthy" factor, when it comes to privacy. As for E2EE, despite allegations that Telegram's encryption is weak, nobody has yet demonstrated that by breaking it. And, those who care about E2EE should perhaps use Signal over WhatsApp, as WhatsApp itself uses their technology.