I agree with you on principal but also think that from a practical point, that ship has long sailed.

It's always been a possibility that when you sent an email to someone their provider could be building an ad profile on you. Any third party tool someone else uses to manage their personal files and communications could always have some arbitrary privacy policy that let them do what they see fit.

For the most part, you never know what random SAAS someone on the other end of a relationship is really using.

▲

palata 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> It's always been a possibility that when you sent an email

Yes, and that's exactly why E2EE messaging became a thing. Signal put it on the map through the WhatsApp integration.

To me there is a difference if the server spies on me (that's without E2EE) or if the person I am writing to leaks everything on the Internet.

If the person you're writing to leaks everything on the Internet, you should consider you are talking to them in public. I'm sure you don't say all the same things when you are in the metro or when you are in private, or do you?

	▲	LoganDark 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> Yes, and that's exactly why E2EE messaging became a thing. Pretty much never for email. Maybe some people go out of their way to perform PGP but that's usually only for the most sensitive of information and sometimes not even for that. The only thing I've used PGP for in many years is encrypting my home address when buying darknet drugs

▲

jimkleiber 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Yes but I'd say some people (me) like WhatsApp because of the privacy and end-to-end encryption. Email i assume is less private but still more private than a public post.

Imagine someone puts all the Signal messages someone else sent them through an AI. I dunno. I think problem is most AI doesn't work like Confer.to, also by Signal's founder.

▲

j_bizzle 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

People have been screenshotting conversations, saving them on their phones, and sending them to friends over text for as long as there have been conversations to screenshot.

The entire concept of conversations being "secure" is only as good as your ability to trust the other party isn't doing something insecure with them (and that yours and their devices are, themselves, as secure as you think they are. Which they generally aren't.)

All of which is to say, it's security theater and always has been when applied to real life situations.

	▲	SchemaLoad 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		There's a difference between small scale screenshotting certain conversations, and wholesale vacuuming up everything in to the AI machine.

▲

42 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

[deleted]

▲

BorisMelnik 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

the ship has long sailed but there is a massive supertanker way worse and we don't have to make it easier on them

▲

j45 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It hasn't since long sailed.

▲

darig 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]