Steam getting better isn't linked to anyone becoming a billionaire. That sentiment sounds like people can't stop looking for things to blame Valve for.

Is it too difficult to accept that every single company failed in competing with Steam? I'd say they didn't even try their best (especially Epic). Must've assumed that just serving a website with a web app is all they needed to get as rich as Gabe.

A replacement isn't a clone

You know I wasn't asking for a replacement. You're suggesting e2ee-first software to people who might not really need it in the first place.

Personally, when I think about all the quirks and requirements that must be met for some chat to happily accept a new member in a e2ee scheme, I get mad. My daily chats, gifs and cat photos aren't worth everyone's effort and discomfort.

Also, I use WhatsApp not because I like it but because it's easier than forcing dozens of people to use something else. I hate it because of how it works, and it doesn't have anything to do with e2ee part (it's worthless for stuff I use WhatsApp for). I like that it dropped electron though - I value my ram.

That's wrong. There is no plaintext transfer. While a lot of stuff can potentially happen on server every second as you said, it doesn't happen according to them. I don't trust that fully either but that's their argument. You can look up encryption schemes in their faq.

Use for what? Are there alternatives that aggregate news, have bot support, non-electron clients and immediately sync between desktop and mobile?

Where something publicly exists anyone can set up a local archive to capture anything, regardless of what's available at the moment of joining the chat. Also telegram has such a setting too. It's useless when someone really wants to get you. They won't need an access to telegram servers to get you.

In their explanation it was specifically stated that it should be either impossible or too difficult. Keeping keys and content separately, that's what it's about iirc. Either way the point of telegram is not in privacy for everyone. You trade protection for convenience (cloud data and great clients), and if you want you can use secret chats. That's it. Seeing their user base, it suits most people. We'll see if their server data gets leaked or something, though it didn't happen yet.

You're still missing the fact that public chats can't be adequately protected.

It's just doesn't really enhance privacy like E2E and I find it disingenuous to say "my chat app is encrypted" when you mean server encryption not E2E.

FWIW when they said that the "e2e" boom has yet to happen.

Oh believe me, group chats are encrypted. Problem is, most of them are public, so that's only to protect them from being exposed to dump/search server side. And yeah, their encryption is not e2e. That's encryption nonetheless.

Seems it's fixed now?

Did someone actually investigate and find the exact place in scripts where this logic takes place?

EDIT: Yes. https://www.androidauthority.com/youtube-reportedly-slowing-down-videos-firefox-3387206/

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Manuel Vonau • Senior Google Editor

(2251 Articles Published)

Except that Ukraine attacking Russia was a lie. Russia and hamas are aggressors.