Re:I don't trust Signal
by dijit on Monday June 19, 2023 @04:46PM
(#36396252)
I think you’re reading much more into that single specific comment; though I am happy to be informed I don't seem yo be getting a lot in the way of information only indications that I am uninformed or stupid or that I don’t understand; all fine comments but I need citations because obviously I am incapable of finding them.
I mentioned a few times that it doesn't materially matter: i could completely remove the entire point about any external funding and let the point stand on: US foundation, authoritative control & aggressive promotion.
I’ll say it clearly again; all these things are small, all can be argued or diminished, people primarily diminish the points by leaning the idea of trust or they take a point of bad optics in isolation, but when they are all together an untrustworthy picture is visible. So “trust” is not enough to lean on.
To answer the point you just made though: I did google search the other things that they funded, and this is what came up and it comes from the time frame you claim they invested everything.
I might sound defensive, but thats because I am in a position of defending the optics, nothing in this entire thread has given a convincing response over why Signal is over-promoted and authoritarian- just a lot of very angry people attempting to argue semantics.
Re:I don't trust Signal
by tptacek on Monday June 19, 2023 @05:12PM
(#36396524)
I don't think casting aspersions on people and calling their reputations into question is a small thing at all. The argument on this thread isn't about semantics: it's about demonstrably false inflammatory things you said in your post.
I mentioned a few times that it doesn't materially matter: i could completely remove the entire point about any external funding and let the point stand on: US foundation, authoritative control & aggressive promotion.
I’ll say it clearly again; all these things are small, all can be argued or diminished, people primarily diminish the points by leaning the idea of trust or they take a point of bad optics in isolation, but when they are all together an untrustworthy picture is visible. So “trust” is not enough to lean on.
To answer the point you just made though: I did google search the other things that they funded, and this is what came up and it comes from the time frame you claim they invested everything.
I might sound defensive, but thats because I am in a position of defending the optics, nothing in this entire thread has given a convincing response over why Signal is over-promoted and authoritarian- just a lot of very angry people attempting to argue semantics.