Telegram: 2 seriously smart brothers, billionaires, hiding in UAE. Governments want to snatch them (and got lucky, last week). Telegram is Web3.0, soo

[readalot]

Session

Thanks for this. I will look into this more.

 

[iris]

What happened to Signal?
I thought it was getting popular, a while ago.
Then Telegram took over

 

[iris]

@Ghoul
Why are you missing from here?

 

[Grey Spartan]

What happened to Signal?

I use Signal, but I think its just personal preference.

 

[narta]

What happened to Signal?
I thought it was getting popular, a while ago.
Then Telegram took over

Anything that has a tel # attached is by default not anonymous

 

[iris]

I use Signal, but I think its just personal preference.

I did download the app, but only a couple of people I knew were using it, so it's now gone.
I read it was better than Telegram, with regards to less data collection and encryption.
But I don't know whether that is true.
In any case, I always think what do I care about.
I don't have anything particular "interesting" or controversial I need to hide.

 

[Grey Spartan]

Anything that has a tel # attached is by default not anonymous

Now that depends what kind of number or if you even use a real tel #

 

[Grey Spartan]

I don't have anything particular "interesting" or controversial I need to hide.

Its not about hiding it about protecting.

 

[Ghoul]

@Ghoul
Why are you missing from here?

You're never anonymous online. Best policy is to avoid going above the "critical threshold" of illegal activities.

No one cares about an end user buying
a kit of Tren. Resources are limited and that could never be a justified pursuit, hence, 50,000+ love letters a year warning about the illegal goods with your name on them the government has IN HAND, yet never follows through with further action.

But start messing with Sched 1/2 substances, weapons, or selling illegal products to any degree, and now you've crossed the line and become a target.

Security through obscurity.

 

[iris]

Its not about hiding it about protecting.

True.
But for me, in reality, that's just semantics.
You are protecting it by keeping it out of sight.
I am just saying, however mundane it is, that's the way it should be.
But, in practice, I have nothing that would be of interest, so I am unconcerned.

 

[Ghoul]

True.
But for me, in reality, that's just semantics.
You are protecting it by keeping it out of sight.
I am just saying, however mundane it is, that's the way it should be.
But, in practice, I have nothing that would be of interest, so I am unconcerned.

The irony is the most security aware, to an extreme degree, tend to be those who, worst case scenario, are facing virtually nothing of consequence, legally.

You could show up at a DEA office, confess to buying the above mentioned kit of tren, and they'd tell you to get out before they have you arrested for trespassing.

 

[iris]

So this thing was developed from Signal

New WhatsApp Alternative "Session" Works Without Your Phone Number

Session is a new open-source messenger app that addresses this issue and doesn't require your phone number to work. Session is technically a fork of another quite popular private messenger Signal. It is available for Androidd, iOS as well as PC.

web.archive.org

The Session Protocol: What’s changing — and why - Session Private Messenger

Session is moving to a purpose-built new encryption protocol: the Session Protocol. Read all about why we’re making the move, and what it means for users.

getsession.org

 

[readalot]

You could show up at a DEA office, confess to buying the above mentioned kit of tren, and they'd tell you to get out before they have you arrested for trespassing.

Can you do a YouTube video of that?

J/k. Please be careful.

 

[readalot]

The irony is the most security aware, to an extreme degree, tend to be those who, worst case scenario, are facing virtually nothing of consequence, legally.

You got me there. Guilty LOL.

 

[Ghoul]

Can you do a YouTube video of that?

J/k. Please be careful.

Well if we're going to be logical, there's little difference between my tongue in cheek example, and putting that kit of tren in the hands of the #2 drug enforcement agency, CBP, with your name and address on it.

I can assure you there wouldn't be a lack of interest and a form letter if it was a bottle of fentanyl pils.

 

[Grey Spartan]

You could show up at a DEA office, confess to buying the above mentioned kit of tren, and they'd tell you to get out before they have you arrested for trespassing.

"But I'm guilty officer"
"I can no longer live with the guilt of sampling the Devils nectar"

 

[Type-IIx]

What is their definition of a "criminal?"

Anybody who breaks any law?

Their latest Terms and Conditions uses a standard of, "illegal [conduct] in most countries." That sweeps steroid activity into the remit.

 

[Type-IIx]

I wonder if "since 2018" is coincidental to Telegram being blocked in Russia.
They Kremlin wanted backdoor access, so all communication in their country can be accessible to Russian security services.
Durov always denied he gave concessions, which is obviously not true and maybe it was further established when they got banned there a couple of years afterwards.

The Russian regime was using Telegram anyway (e.g. during Covid) and I doubt they would have done so, had the system been as impenetrable and out of their control as advertised.
It was never secure messaging anyway, unless one selected a specific option within its settings.
The French incident just cemented it and made it all public.
Cute how the Russians took a stand against Durov's arrest.

When he got held in France, the media was all a flutter with talk of freedom of speech and censorship.
It's fair enough, as are considerations of private communication being violated.

I do want private communication to be so.
But, practically, I find this ambivalence where anything that goes on online should be blindly allowed because it is private, things that irl would never be accepted in a civil society, just because the system is supposed to be impenetrable, for everyone's sake.
Should there be an unaccountable laissez-fair attitude when it comes to online behaviour, that we are willing to accept?
Should a line be drawn?
Can you establish boundaries with no moderation and scrutiny, of any kind?

It's quite funny how Telegram's owner has chosen the UAE, that bastion of liberalism, human rights and free speech oasis as one of his countries of residence.
Just run away from the Russians and find a more enlightened place to call home.
Oh yes, he also has a French passport. Just in case.

Sums up my thoughts as well. Basically, all that I want to add is that I think that TG is still great technology, as in leaps and bounds ahead of Western social media at its core. It's exciting; what they have created. An ecosystem, it really is like Web3.0 from where I sit. Translations on the fly (Pro, Biz); powerful communities. It's the Gold Standard.

This precipice at which they find themselves will define their future. They can choose to go the route of a Banana Republic, or meet the standards of the international consensus. If they do the latter, I believe they're poised for growth rather than failure or even contraction myself.

 

[narta]

This precipice at which they find themselves will define their future. They can choose to go the route of a Banana Republic, or meet the standards of the international consensus. If they do the latter, I believe they're poised for growth rather than failure or even contraction myself.

I think the decision has already been made with the launch of TON and their whole integration of Web3.0 tech into the ecosystem. The latest push towards "legitimacy through intl law compliance" is just a way to make it official.