The idea that messaging apps are a problem (or for that matter the suggestion that QAnon believers shouldn't be allowed to talk to one another) is a poisonous direction for this debate to take. The problem is one of a major political party embracing extremism and irrealityhttps://twitter.com/donie/status/1400231752963088386 …
-
-
The same basic tradeoff—use cryptographic tools to move some areas of human interaction out of the reach of government—has divergent implications depending on whether you're talking about money or speech. Where I land on this is "talk all you want, but hold on to your wallet."
Show this thread -
(For the record, I do support size limits on E2E encrypted chat. I wholeheartedly support anyone's right to private conversation, but don't want to live in a world where 10,000 people can have an unmonitorable chat room. Luckily, Telegram removes the dilemma by being unencrypted)
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Telegram isn't even encrypted by default, and I don't even think it can do e2e for groups. People are just hopping from one platform to the next every time they get banned
-
Yeah, it's way overblown. Plus Telegram is where you *want* bad people plotting stuff in groups, since it's so easily penetrated.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Why don't you think so? Each is a tradeoff, but a world of unregulated money transfer is a gangster world, while a world where people can talk in private is not.
- Show replies
-
-
-
you must really like this “cryptocurrency doesn’t work” schtick to keep repeating it even though it’s fatal to your argument.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.