this post was submitted on 27 Feb 2026
640 points (98.5% liked)

Privacy

46649 readers
1406 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 

“Telegram is not a private messenger. There’s nothing private about it. It’s the opposite. It’s a cloud messenger where every message you’ve ever sent or received is in plain text in a database that Telegram the organization controls and has access to it”

“It’s like a Russian oligarch starting an unencrypted version of WhatsApp, a pixel for pixel clone of WhatsApp. That should be kind of a difficult brand to operate. Somehow, they’ve done a really amazing job of convincing the whole world that this is an encrypted messaging app and that the founder is some kind of Russian dissident, even though he goes there once a month, the whole team lives in Russia, and their families are there.”

" What happened in France is they just chose not to respond to the subpoena. So that’s in violation of the law. And, he gets arrested in France, right? And everyone’s like, oh, France. But I think the key point is they have the data, like they can respond to the subpoenas where as Signal, for instance, doesn’t have access to the data and couldn’t respond to that same request.  To me it’s very obvious that Russia would’ve had a much less polite version of that conversation with Pavel Durov and the telegram team before this moment"

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 2 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

I even took the time to quote that, because it’s important.

What's important is that you're quoting me out of context, and that makes all the difference. The actual statement you're replying to is:

You don’t have to trust anybody when you run your own server, or you use a server that doesn’t collect information it has no business collecting.

The fact that you proceed to quote me out of context and then accuse me of being wrong shows that you lack even a modicum of intellectual integrity. Then you proceed to make a straw man arguing against something I never claimed.

Just becuase it’s less likely to find nefarious code in open source doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

So yes, this is very clearly a discussion in bad faith, where you're arguing against a straw man while ignoring what I actually wrote. It's especially incredible since I even followed up with a more detailed explanation which you just ignored:

There’s a big difference between having confidence in open source code that has been audited by many people, and knowing for a fact that the service collects specific information. In the former case, you can never be absolutely sure that the code is not malicious so there is always a risk, but in the latter case you know for a fact that the service is collecting inappropriate information and you have to trust that people operating the service are not using it in adversarial ways. These two scenarios are in no way equivalent.

Do better.

[–] daychilde@lemmy.world -2 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

You can take your rudeness and bugger off. I'm done with you.

Make all the accusations you want. You think you're smart, but you are not.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 2 points 6 hours ago

Ah yes clutching them pearls, when called out on outright lying.

Bye!