-
Someone has purpose to make money from Signal or open source chat app like this?
-
-
yall should also check out Session (getsession.org) it's pretty sweet - a fork of Signal protocol with the backend using the Loki/Oxen network and in the table above, requires zero of the 19 permissions that Signal requires. I personally REALLY enjoy it.
The downsides are obvious here in the usability department. In order to get to chatting with someone, you HAVE to exchange keys. Signal makes that easier cause they generate QR codes but also integrate with your contacts.
One thing to note, however, as a plus to Signal, is they use confidential computing on Azure to hide all the contacts processing, which is a really great use of that particular tech.
@doodlemania2 said in Best privacy chat apps:
yall should also check out Session (getsession.org) it's pretty sweet - a fork of Signal protocol with the backend using the Loki/Oxen network and in the table above, requires zero of the 19 permissions that Signal requires. I personally REALLY enjoy it.
The downsides are obvious here in the usability department. In order to get to chatting with someone, you HAVE to exchange keys. Signal makes that easier cause they generate QR codes but also integrate with your contacts.
One thing to note, however, as a plus to Signal, is they use confidential computing on Azure to hide all the contacts processing, which is a really great use of that particular tech.
Session is great. The developers are nice people and do regular, video updates on progress. The Session team is also involved in development of Lokinet, which is like a low-latency, more secure TOR. You can run services on Lokinet, for example, this imageboard supports it:
https://forum.cloudron.io/topic/9591/jschan-on-cloudron-imageboard-for-our-times
-
Have created a "Cloudron" Group in Session, for both testing, and off-the-record chat (well, as much as all other members have a record). DM me for my Session ID. It's probably safe to post publicly, but no hurry to find out otherwise from haste
@marcusquinn said in Best privacy chat apps:
Have created a "Cloudron" Group in Session, for both testing, and off-the-record chat (well, as much as all other members have a record). DM me for my Session ID. It's probably safe to post publicly, but no hurry to find out otherwise from haste
There are some lists published of Session Groups. You could mention it and have it listed there.
https://session.directory/
https://lokilocker.com/Mods/Session-Groups/wiki/?action=_pages -
@atridad said in Best privacy chat apps:
@necrevistonnezr IMO I'd remove anything that is owned by big tech OR is closed source from that list. How can we ever ensure a closed source application is secure?
Personally, I don't like Signal, for it is just another WhatsApp were you could be tracked by GPS/Beacon and meta-data. I saw too much anti-government group using Signal and being intercepted simply by correlating the high level of exchange in Signal (metadata) and movement tracking (GPS).
For the fact, saying Close Source is not secure by default, it is simply a point of view. Few companies with whom I work do business with the military and don't want to use anything Open Source because for them Open Source sound full of flaws and weaken their defence.
@JOduMonT said in Best privacy chat apps:
Few companies with whom I work do business with the military and don't want to use anything Open Source because for them Open Source sound full of flaws and weaken their defence.
few vs a few
few < a few
A few girls have blonde hair or blue eyes or a beautiful smile.
Few girls have all of these. They are unicorns.I saw him at the party. A few girls were with him. He must be quite popular.
Few girls like his friend though. For some reason, he lacks charisma.It is similar with little vs a little
He had little to drink, so he should be OK driving.
I had a little, so he can give me a ride.I like little spice in my food, so I will have the ordinary mashed potatoes.
You can have the Bombay potatoes, which have a little chile. -
I am a bit late to the party, but a messenger I love to use is Threema Libre. Using the Web client / Desktop is a bit a hickup since you have to log in every day, but I really like the security aspect.
-
Handy spreadsheet comparing features:
-
Interesting : the only app from that analysis with 100% green (or N/A) is Simplex (https://simplex.chat/)
-
Interesting : the only app from that analysis with 100% green (or N/A) is Simplex (https://simplex.chat/)
@timconsidine I did try to use SimpleX with a friend. I use iOS, friend use Android. I tried to like SimpleX, but it was not such a good experience. Very battery consuming and many App crashes on both(!) devices.
-
For me Signal still provides the best balance of stability/ usability/ privacy (although to be honest I've not tried most of the apps listed in that spreadsheet as Signal is Good Enough for me and I've got various functioning groups on there that include not very technical people)
-
For me Signal still provides the best balance of stability/ usability/ privacy (although to be honest I've not tried most of the apps listed in that spreadsheet as Signal is Good Enough for me and I've got various functioning groups on there that include not very technical people)
@jdaviescoates And they allow usernames now, for phone number privacy.
Web Design https://www.evergreen.je
Development https://brandlight.org
Life https://marcusquinn.com -
@jdaviescoates And they allow usernames now, for phone number privacy.
@marcusquinn indeed. I'm now @jdaviescoates.01 on there
-
@marcusquinn indeed. I'm now @jdaviescoates.01 on there
@jdaviescoates said in Best privacy chat apps:
@marcusquinn indeed. I'm now @jdaviescoates.01 on there
sending p0rn.....
NOW!
-
You might want to take a look at the Messenger Matrix, which was compiled by security expert Mike Kuketz:
-
@marcusquinn like what? What are they/ have they replaced. Nothing as far as I'm aware.
A single Bitcoin transaction uses more energy than an average U.S. household uses in 2 months!
I mean, perhaps you're referring to how much banks still invest in fossil fuels? But if you think web3 is going to replace banks any time soon you are wrong
A 10-year old iPhone could process more transactions per second than the entirety of the Bitcoin network it's so insanely slow.
@jdaviescoates said in Best privacy chat apps:
A single Bitcoin transaction uses more energy than an average U.S. household uses in 2 months!
....
A 10-year old iPhone could process more transactions per second than the entirety of the Bitcoin network it's so insanely slow.
These two statements don't seem to reconcile. If I combine them, then "A 10-year old iPhone uses more energy than several average US households do in 2 months to process more transactions than the entirety of the Bitcoin network". If this were true, that 10-year old iPhone would rack up HUGE electricity bills for whoever has it plugged in at home (at least 2 months x # of transactions).
A life lived in fear is a life half-lived
-
@jdaviescoates said in Best privacy chat apps:
A single Bitcoin transaction uses more energy than an average U.S. household uses in 2 months!
....
A 10-year old iPhone could process more transactions per second than the entirety of the Bitcoin network it's so insanely slow.
These two statements don't seem to reconcile. If I combine them, then "A 10-year old iPhone uses more energy than several average US households do in 2 months to process more transactions than the entirety of the Bitcoin network". If this were true, that 10-year old iPhone would rack up HUGE electricity bills for whoever has it plugged in at home (at least 2 months x # of transactions).
-
@scooke why would you combine them? The "10-year old iPhone" (although I've literally no idea why I chose to write specifically that) wouldn't be processing blockchain transactions.
@jdaviescoates I'm just using the terms that were in the post. "A single Bitcoin transaction...", "iPhone ... process more transactions". Both transactions are on the blockchain. Perhaps the first statement was trying to say something more like "ALL the computers connected to the blockchain when a transaction occurs use more energy than...". The first statement sounds like an exaggeration and frankly won't sway most away from using Bitcoin (well, any phrase always has the potential to sway some number of people any which way). It wouldn't be accurate to say that ALL computers connected to the blockchain are essential for any given transaction to process, but that is what is implied. It isn't true. It certainly is fine and good for people to make others aware that there are costs associated with Bitcoin, but I'd avoid fearmongering.
I thought I'd brush up my info before posting, and read https://river.com/learn/how-does-a-bitcoin-transaction-work/. So, yeah, I can't confirm how much energy a given mining NODE uses to mine a specific order, but it still looks to me like fearmongering when the costs are talked about, generally.
