Remix clone Hacker News

> When I said Telegram only has E2EE in internet debates, that means people like you who love to point out it's technically there, but who also fail to understand what it takes for such feature to be even used on a daily basis.

But you are being dishonest when you make an incorrect statement like this. Don't do that.

EDIT:

> makes you look like an astroturfer employed by Telegram: https://tsf.telegram.org/

I just read the linked page through: this is a request for volunteers to answer support questions for Telegram. How did you make the mental leap from a request for support volunteers to recruitment ad for astroturfers?

▲

maqp 4 days ago | parent [-]

The content is lies. E.g.

https://tsf.telegram.org/manuals/e2ee-simple#are-cloud-chats...

Talks about "unique distributed architecture" which I have debunked here

https://security.stackexchange.com/a/243172

When people parrot those lies, they're being useful idiots, which Russia has used for ages https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot Durov is trained in information warfare and propaganda https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/03/technology/once-celebrate... He knows what he's doing.

▲

emptysongglass 4 days ago | parent [-]

You've gone way off base here and have made a colorful array of unfounded accusations, including strongly hinting I must be part of an astroturfing brigade, that Secret Chats only available on mobile devices constitutes an intentional "backdoor", that I am a "useful idiot", that for the purposes of internet argumentation E2EE chats don't actually exist, etc.

What I asked you to do was to stop misrepresenting your own bizarre theories as fact and stop linking microblog posts and blog posts describing vulnerabilities of a completely rewritten protocol that have nothing to do with its current. That is dishonest and not a reasonable basis for any argument.

There are many ways of honestly portraying the problems of Telegram without resorting to false inventions, such as its immense problem of spam and ads and the fact that E2EE is not available across all devices and for group chats.

▲

maqp 3 days ago | parent [-]

Yeah ok I reviewed some of your post history and figured this isn't the first time you're being called out for your opinions. You've been downvoted about this topic for the past several years. It's not even the first time we two are having this discussion. You obviously aren't someone who changes their mind when presented with arguments so it makes zero sense to continue. Take care my weird Russian oligarch defending Dane.

	▲	emptysongglass 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		"Some of my" post history? Do you realize how many comments I've made here? How far back did you have to go? Did you also get to the part where I have repeatedly stood up for Ukraine's sovereignty and presented arguments against anyone defending Russia's invasion of Ukraine? How for one second do you think the way you've conducted yourself with me is acceptable? Linking to vulnerabilities in a protocol that hasn't been used for 8 years and misrepresenting that fact by omission is simply unethical. Attack my arguments with reasonable, evidence-based arguments. Do not make personal attacks. That is in the HN rules. You've presented falsehoods and unfounded conspiracy theories. I've called you out on them. I expect better from any human being on Hacker News and I will continue to, whatever the topic.