"In 2019, France’s best known climate expert sat down to work with its most feted graphic novelist. The result? Perhaps the most terrifying comic ever drawn.
Part history, part analysis, part vision for the future, World Without End weaves the story of humanity’s rapacious appetite for fossil fuel energy, how it has made possible the society people take for granted, and its disastrous effects on the climate.
Among French readers it was an immediate smash hit, selling more than 1m copies so far, becoming the country’s top-selling book in all categories in 2022 and hailed as “one of the most brilliant summaries of climate issues ever written”."
The risk being that the experience will be miserable. I can totally imagine a world where you can talk between Signal and WhatsApp, but reactions don't work, sending files doesn't work properly, changing permissions in a group doesn't propagate, etc.
Unless you force everybody to use the exact same protocol, with the exact same features, and to never add or change a feature.
I think you totally missed the point. Let me rephrase it: as per the EU legislation, I got a popup in WhatsApp that was saying that I have a right to object to their data collection. I followed those links and got the e-mail above.
They are essentially telling me: "You need to put the right words in your e-mail if you want us to take you seriously, but we are counting on the fact that you don't, and therefore we work around your right to object".
Hence my question here. If somebody found a way to send the right words to WhatsApp and shared them, I could send the exact same e-mail. Or differently, if we could find a "good e-mail" to send and WhatsApp still refused to acknowledge it, then EU-based users could complain to the EU and possibly get the law with them.
The whole point of my question is that I want to see how far I can leverage the GDPR with WhatsApp. I do use other apps, but that is not the question :-)
> You'd be right, if you had any proof of WhatsApp being E2EE in the traditional sense.
Fair point. Though last time I checked Telegram, nothing except the secret chats was end-to-end encrypted. So there I know that the features people like on Telegram are definitely not E2EE.
> The security is robust and the features and services are much better.
Features and services, I can accept that. Security... well again, only the secret chats are E2EE, and last time I checked, the secret chats didn't have more features than Signal.
> Features and services, I can accept that. Security... well again, only the secret chats are E2EE, and last time I checked, the secret chats didn't have more features than Signal.
That doesn't mean they're in plain text. MTProto 2.0 is an audited and robust algorithm.
E2EE's cloud sync support is not very good, which is why Telegram doesn't use it because Cloud Sync is one of the best features of Telegram.
> Meaning that the Telegram server (and whoever has access to it) has plaintext access to the messages.
No, that's not really true. They use a distributed key generation system. The keys are stored in multiple jurisdictions. No telegram employee or government can decrypt the messages. All the servers would have to be compromised to reach that 'plaintext access' that you mentioned.
Fwiw, my family and friends are also not on matrix. Setting up an iMessage bridge (with a spare apple device) and a sms bridge has enabled me to use matrix with them.
It's nice being able to message from my phone and Linux desktop without any trouble
I'm so tired of this answer. You have phones, right? You know, you dial ten or so digits and then you flap your mouthholes at the grill and pretend you're human?
Nah, let's just use the platform owned by the war criminal because everyone is there with our tech-ignorant relatives as our excuse. I hope you all meet a Rohingya one day.
"If you don't like reality, numb it out like the rest of us man."
We do have to practice tolerance of certain things, but genocide is not one of em. I'm sorry it makes you uncomfortable to know that you're using the same platform that was used by state-supported mass murderers and the executives knew about it and took the money, but allowing others to tend to their own discomfort is the deepest of compliments.
We're discussing WhatsApp in this post. Read the subject line.
I mentioned war crimes, and the [word] Rohingya, and that is enough for any curious mind to google and learn what I am talking about.
But since you're determined to do a thorough demonstration of willful incuriosity, what I am talking about is, Facebook, owned by Meta, which owns WhatsApp, was used as a platform to foment and execute a genocide in the country of Mynanmar, against the Rohingya muslim minority. Meta executives knew about it and did nothing, cause hey, brown people in that part of the world, who cares.
For every bad thing that's been done using WhatsApp I could name 10 great things done using the platform. No one is going to use your shitty alternative app dude.
Also it's spelled Myanmar. You can't even spell the name right of the country that you're all upset about. Were you personally affected by what happened there? I bet you just like to cherry-pick tragedies and use them to virtue signal your depressed world view on Hacker News.
Man you have no clue how many people I moved to Signal. I actually contributed to Signal years ago. So respectfully, f** you (if you're going on that tone).
There are just some people that still keep WhatsApp, meaning I need it.
If you're living in the European Region or in the UK, you can submit an objection to such processing of your personal information with this form and select "How can I make an objection to the processing of my information." Please provide your email address and WhatsApp phone number so we can process your request.
You will then be asked for the following information by email:
- What information processing you are objecting to: the processing activities carried out by WhatsApp on the basis of legitimate interests are listed above
- How this processing impacts you; under the GDPR and the UK GDPR, you have a right to object on grounds relating to your particular situation. This is important for us to be able to review and assess your objection. This is why we ask you to explain how the processing affects you (such as what rights and freedoms you believe are impacted by the processing and why)
- Any additional information you believe will help us review your objection (optional)
We may ask you for more information if your request is incomplete.
```
So yeah, obviously they don't want to tell me what would be a valid request from my end.
Well Signal Messenger is nice. I am using WhatsApp because of network effect: some people are on WhatsApp and not on something else (Signal is the most popular alternative where I am, Threema is third. Never heard of Veilid).
Right. I get that it is marginally more convenient (though I could imagine a stand on which you could plug your phone with one hand). Not sure if it's worth the wasted energy though.
Regarding the lightning/USB port, it feels like a bad solution to a real problem. Couldn't the manufacturer make them more robust/easier to replace, instead of selling more hardware that wastes more energy?
Part history, part analysis, part vision for the future, World Without End weaves the story of humanity’s rapacious appetite for fossil fuel energy, how it has made possible the society people take for granted, and its disastrous effects on the climate.
Among French readers it was an immediate smash hit, selling more than 1m copies so far, becoming the country’s top-selling book in all categories in 2022 and hailed as “one of the most brilliant summaries of climate issues ever written”."