Mozilla will want to be API-compatible, but there’s nothing inherent to the API that requires the arbitrary content-blocking limitation that Google put in. So, Mozilla will be API-compatible without adopting this shitty limitation.
Interesting, I didn’t know that, but it doesn’t really change anything about my comment. Mozilla can offer APIs in addition to what Manifest v3 offers, allowing extensions that want to do these things to do them. It’s already the case today, for example, that uBlock Origin makes use of additional APIs for more effective ad blocking on Firefox.
Why would they want to stop? This is their fight against adblockers and on Chromium based browsers it's an effective way so of course they keep pushing. ;)
I don’t want to hear the realistic argumentation of why this is proceeding. I want to live in my fantasy headspace where comments like this can stop superpower megacorps from being assholes…okay? 😅
does anyone know roughly how much operating costs could be per person? I'd like to donate, but I don't have a whole lot of money. I'd like to at least ensure that I'm covering "my share" so to speak
Signal had 40 million active users in 2021. With 14 million in infra cost, that comes to .35 per user/year. Total expenses are about 33 million, so about .825 per user/year. All in all that seems very reasonable.
Actually it does not, sadly. I’ve used it for years (probably five or even more) and ditched it couple months ago when I got angry at it. The main problem is I could not force it to accept MMS on newer android (used to work on my old phone IIRC) which is crucial for my work - because voice mail gets delivered as MMS in my country. Every time I got work phone call that I missed meant voice mail that never got delivered. I got notification that I have MMS, and that I need to allow them, but that’s it. Everything was allowed in the app and in the systsm, still no MMS.
Same. I've been supporting it for some years now, but I'm upping the ante. I have many friends, family, and business associates I've been able to get on Signal. It's a super useful app, and a crucial privacy service. Let's do what we can to keep it going.
Umm, doesn't one have to backup anything one wants to save/ have access to in the future? Aren't upgrades a thing will all software? I'm not sure how this is different for Signal versus any other messaging app. Or any app / client that produces documents, etc?
The process is a bit involved on mobile. Setting up a backup location, using a third party app to sync updates and deletions etc. It could be simplified by integrating with common cloud storage services (the encrypted file)
Also iOS doesn’t have backups at all last I checked. If you lose your phone the messages are toast
Well sure, but encrypted backups are still secure. What’s not secure (or private rather) is someone realizing they can’t have a backup of important chats and going back to Facebook Messenger.
Backups are a thing on Android, and they’re planned for iOS. It just hasn’t happened yet. People can choose what they want to backup and when they want disappearing messages turned on.
Bit difficult to keep using it since they killed sms interoperability. I understand the security concerns but if no one uses it, doesn’t really matter does it.
If you were using Signal just for SMS, none of your messages were secure anyway since the SMS protocol itself is not–defeating the purpose of signal. And if you had already convinced people to install Signal by using SMS as a caveat, you can just continue contacting them through the app.
I was able to convince pretty much everyone who matter in my life to install Signal and they all love it because WhatsApp has become too cluttered and spammy.
I can’t get anyone to use it. They should market it as a workaround for the Android/iPhone/PC messaging issues with privacy and security as a bonus, but I don’t know if iPhone users would go for it.
iPhone user and monthly signal donor here. Have been using it since it was available for signal. Have managed to get everyone I care about to install and use it.
I basically made it the only way to message me and get my attention.
I’m not that special, I just care about my friends and I think they might like me enough to do this one thing for me. At least they know they can cut me out of their lives by uninstalling signal.
That’s a good point. One of the two biggest weak points of a so-called e2e provider/platform is, the e2e provider itself.
The only true e2e is e.g. Alice does gpg -ea on an offline computer, copy-pastes ascii and sends it to Bob via an online computer, who copy-pastes this ascii to his offline computer and does gpg -d there. Their seckeys are airgapped from the communication channel. Sharing your sec with a provider is especially ridiculous (e.g. Proton). At least that’s what I think.
Leave it to the cryptocurrency people to turn a simple tutorial into an ad.
I’m from the same Lemmy instance monero.town (technically a mod?) and can see your point. Initially I was vocal about perceived link-spamming, advertising this SimplifiedPrivacy thing; at least a few users there were/are feeling the same way, as you can see e.g. here. So please don’t lump crypto (esp. Monero) users as a single kind of people.
Like @leraje pointed out, some of info provided by this user (ShadowRebel) can be useful. Perhaps some people prefer a video to text. Monero users tend to respect freedom (of speech) and advertisement is not forbidden in Monero.town anyway. Perhaps you can understand that this does not mean “the cryptocurrency people” are the same.
@ride I know the background: this info could be very useful, and you commented, “Even if not directly Monero-related, this draws attention to the community when such contributions come from here.”
The problem is, !privacyguides has a different set of rules than Monero.town does, explicitly stating:
This is not the place for self-promotion if you are not listed on privacyguides.org. If you want to be listed, make a suggestion on our forum first.
Hence, as you can see in monero.town/post/1085883 (you double-posted the same thing, too), a negative comment about this:
I feel like this might count as self-promotion, given it’s mentioning a particular website, their GitHub, their running service, etc. Regardless, it is informative
@LWD is not “childish”, even stating “it is informative.” But even if this post may be useful, we should follow the rules of !privacyguides when (cross-)posting here; otherwise, Monero.town may look bad.
Yes, and it is very feature complete. It’s what I use.
The paid plans are largely just a way to support development, but specifically it allows you to use custom domains, not just automatically generated ones. There’s some other benefits like PGP and wildcard domains, but the custom domains seems like the biggest draw to a paid plan in my book.
Don’t worry, you’re not breaking it to me 😄. I’ve never found the need for more than 10 aliases myself and I could be wrong but I think that needing more than 10 functioning aliases at a given time is a bit of a fringe case when it comes to the average user. It sounds like your comments are based on pretty heavy usage.
I’m not saying that Simple Login is better than the other two services (which I’ve never used so can’t compare) However, from using the free tier of the service for years now the free version of Simple Login is feature complete and does not make you bump in to pay walls.
The SimplyTranslate front end has many languages, translate engines selectable: Google | DeepL (Testing) | ICIBA | Reverso | LibreTranslate. Some instances are Tor-friendly, even onion. The project page seems to be codeberg.org/SimpleWeb/SimplyTranslate
Refusing to use Google is just common sense. LibreTranslate itself is decent (at least not Google), except a website hosting it may have some opaque JS or Google things (Font, Analytics, TagManagers, etc.)
Either way, translation can’t be super-private in general. For example, if you use it to write a private message or love letter in a foreign language… even including real names and physical addresses…
Also, metadata like “a Danish-speaker is reading this German text about X” can’t be hidden, and if the language pair is uncommon and/or if text to be translated is specialized (not generic), the engine provider may easily guess “this request and that request yesterday may be from the same user”, etc. if they want to. A sufficiently powerful “attacker” might de-anonymize you, helped by other info about you, already gathered. In practice, maybe not a big concern, if you’re just translating generic, non-sensitive text, not showing your real IP, and clearing cookies frequently.
privacyguides
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.