this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2023
256 points (86.2% liked)
Technology
59192 readers
3581 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The article isn't very, uh, articulate in its reasoning. Nothing here is an actual real life problem it's all just what-ifs, and 2 billion people aren't going to quit using it
A teen in Nebraska was sentenced to 3 months in jail because Facebook turned over her "private" messages but sure, no real life problems with trusting meta with your "encrypted" messages.
I do not disagree with your basic premise and I completely disagree with the Nebraska prosecution but I think people need to understand that everything we do online it's monitored.
If they can't get the actual message data, they will use meta data (e.g. two parties sending and receiving data packets that match in size and time of occurrence and protocol and are known to each other) or whatever.
If you are doing something you are worried about other people knowing about, do not use any digital form of communication. Full stop. There is no privacy online.
You're absolutely right, there's no privacy online. But there are significantly better alternatives that offer end to end encryption and sometimes digital communication is required.
Yes, I agree, for example credit card transaction processing or business communication with trade secrets in it. For most people doing things they want kept private but which is not illegal, basic encryption is great.
If I were going to plot the overthrow of a government, I'd try to as much as possible offline.
That was Facebook Messenger too, completely different app and problem, not that Whatsapp isnt better or worse.
I used it as an example because they're both owned by meta and make similar promises on privacy and encryption.
If you wanted something unforgivable Whatsapp is proprietary software and thus restricts your freedom. Using nonfree software is an abuse in of itself.