
"We are getting 100 new registrations every second." - antr
https://twitter.com/telegram/status/437313902058426368
======
dispense
"800,000 users from the Netherlands and counting."
[https://twitter.com/telegram/status/437275755312345089](https://twitter.com/telegram/status/437275755312345089)

This is speculative, but I think Telegram actually has enough momentum at the
moment to overtake WhatsApp as the main instant messaging service in the
Netherlands--if they are able to adequately handle the massive amount of new
registrations. The general public definitely seems to be uncomfortable
privacy-wise with the acquisition of WhatsApp by Facebook. So much for privacy
being dead.

[https://twitter.com/search?q=telegram%20lang%3Anl&src=typd&f...](https://twitter.com/search?q=telegram%20lang%3Anl&src=typd&f=realtime)
Telegram is definitely a trending topic on Twitter in the Netherlands.

~~~
vijayr
The thing that bothers me is this - any service that we use and are happy
with, can be bought by FB. Then FB would own all of that data - so it doesn't
matter if we don't use FB - first instagram, now whatsapp (there are probably
others that I can't remember). This is good for the founders of whatsapp - not
sure about the users though. It is hard to say no to boatload of cash, I
guess.

~~~
atmosx
What is your concern exactly? If it's privacy, from state level organizations
like NSA you shouldn't be using mainstream IMs anyway. If it's just Zuckerberg
then Telegram is fine and WhatsUp is not (anymore). If it's none of the above,
then you're fine.

~~~
fractalsea
I think the point is is that even if you don't use mainstream services, than
there's nothing stopping Facebook buying up whatever you were using at some
point in the future.

~~~
atmosx
Well, if the conversation is encrypted and the connections are routed through
tor, you don't really care who intercepts what.

------
Oculus
Is this the same messengering app that had the whole encryption debacle a
month or two ago?

~~~
darklajid
To be fair: If we're talking 'replace WhatsApp', the 'had security issues'
point is - well - comparable. Competitive? :)

I stay with xmpp.

~~~
MichaelGG
WhatsApp didn't go on about their security and mock security expert's
opinions, either. Telegram intentionally built their own encryption, did a
poor job, summarily dismissed expert criticism, and set up a shame contest.
That kind of behaviour is far worse than an "SMS-replacement" service not
really putting much effort into security.

------
chaz
100/s = 8.6M per day. That seems unrealistically high, even for the most viral
of apps. WhatsApp is currently at 1M per day. Either Telegram means requests
of some sort or they're getting DDoS'd.

Edit: looks like it might be a spike because WhatsApp is currently down:
[https://twitter.com/wa_status/status/437319926605680640](https://twitter.com/wa_status/status/437319926605680640)

~~~
matznerd
I doubt it is 24 hours a day, and it is obviously related to WhatsApp
acquisition...

~~~
dethstar
is not related to the acquisition, is related to the fact that WhatsApp isn't
working right now.

~~~
namenotrequired
Definitely to both. Telegram has been going viral for several days.

------
tjaerv
[https://core.telegram.org/techfaq#q-why-do-you-use-
sha-1-in-...](https://core.telegram.org/techfaq#q-why-do-you-use-sha-1-in-the-
place-of-a-mac)

> Q: Why do you use SHA-1 in the place of a MAC?

> Technically speaking, in our implementation SHA-1 can be seen as a specific
> case of a MAC (but not HMAC), since it is also used as an encryption key.

> We use it, because it is faster, especially when you need to send photos or
> large videos (Telegram supports videos and documents up to 1Gb). And since
> this means still requiring at least 2^128 operations (instead of 2^256 with,
> say, SHA-2) to even begin trying to break this scheme, the trade-off seems
> fair.

------
necolas
Questionable choice of marketing image
[https://telegram.org/img/tl_card_open.png?1](https://telegram.org/img/tl_card_open.png?1)

~~~
sethammons
What is it even supposed to convey? It seems that often advertising and
marketing forget that they are supposed to, you know, communicate something to
someone.

~~~
Ryanmf
"open"

(Though it doesn't make _no_ sense, and I personally find the illustration
more cute than offensive, it was probably a poor choice.)

------
yuvadam
Telegram? No thanks.

I'll continue to use WhatsApp for another month or so, until TextSecure
becomes available for iOS, after which I'll be helping everyone I know switch
to it.

~~~
tmikaeld
Any specific reason why not Telegram?

~~~
darklajid
Not the GP, but: No open-source server as far as I can tell (i.e. "cannot host
it myself") and questionable security track record at the moment. The latter
is something that can be fixed in parts, but .. without the ability to _not_
send my private conversations to a random company and tie my "identity" to
their service I've got to decline.

To be clear: I've never used WhatsApp either - so I'm not really supporting
the 'WhatsApp > Telegram' idea.

------
ElongatedTowel
The cycle of messanging.

"We need a way to communicate over the internet". Email was born.

"We need a way to communicate with groups". Messaging boards and mailing lists
are born.

"We need a way to communicate quickly and privately". Email is now only a tool
for spam, registration mails and professionalism. AIM, ICQ and MSN are born.
Email lists are "when you click on that list button in Outlook" to the general
public.

"We need a way to communicate on the go". Messaging boards die. People use
Facebook to chat. Twitter grows. Old-style protocols can't keep up despite
offering more. SMS is that thing that does exactly the same but costs money.

"We need a way to communicate with groups again". No one was using boards
anymore so no one developed new and edgy alternatives. Discourse is born.
Nothing new is offered, but JavaScript! Ajax! Frameworks! Apps!

"We need a way to communicate quickly and privately again". Old protocols are
reinvented. Poorly. WhatApps and competitors arise. People using XMPP and OTR
die of loneliness. Solved problems are solved again. Poorly. But now there's
an app for that. Even on Windows Phone (never seen one in the wild).

Time to reinvent Email. Or not.

------
slig
Maybe they're overloaded, but it doesn't seem to work for me or my friend. We
both can't see each other on the contacts list.

Either that or they don't work well with our phone number format.

~~~
antr
It's down for me. They seem to be having some real scaling issues. This is no
joke.

------
huhtenberg
Talk about being in the right place at the right time.

------
United857
Just speculation, but could this have anything to do with what's happening in
Ukraine at the moment?

------
tigerweeds
trying to install it as we speak. Won't send me the SMS verification message.

~~~
antr
[https://twitter.com/telegram/status/437327903572131841](https://twitter.com/telegram/status/437327903572131841)

------
Fasebook
What is telegram and can I run my own copper?

~~~
qqg3
WhatsApp clone, may also be a joke.

~~~
dethstar
I'm not sure it is a joke, my friends chat on fb were talking about, and they
found out about it cuz some other friends were talking about it in their
timelines.

Whatsapp is down, so people are looking for alternatives of course. Sad is not
textsecure instead.

~~~
dz0ny
Textsecure has obviously problem with 'how to use this thing' and 'we don't
want another SMS app'.

