Nothing short of heroic - too many people in a similar situation find themselves saying that it's awful what's happening, but there's nothing they can do about it.
I feel like the TOS you are subject to is the one you signed when you first used the service. Unless you have been constantly using their service, I can’t see how a new TOS would affect you. I could be WAAY off here because IANAL, but a company can’t just retroactively change the TOS for customers without some kind of action taken by the customers under the new TOS.
I once successfully defended myself from a lawsuit by invoking a previous TOS. The court allowed me to choose any version of the TOS that benefited me the most. It was akin the doctrine in contract law that ambiguity is always found to be detrimental to the drafter of the contract.
Contracts are way less enforceable in courts then the writers would hope. Basically the enforceable parts are payment and performance and anything directly related to that. Once you start adding clauses that are outside of that realm they become more and more of a waste of ink.
You’re right. I just want to add the proper terms for people to search for in case this information helps them. The main matters considered in contract law are “consideration and performance”. Happy hunting y’all. Take down these corporations that do not care for you.
Yes, payment isn’t necessary, it’s just that consideration is payment 99% of the time for the average Joe, to the point where the first definition of consideration is “payment or money” but there are certainly contracts out there where it isn’t money.
You’re right. I only wanted to include the search term for anyone wanting to pursue this on their own. I think it is better to search the proper term and build knowledge from there than to summarize it and hope laymen understand the underlying principles.
I'm not sure if lawyers think their words are magic sometimes, or if they'd just really like them to be magic.
I live in a state that prohibits most non-competes from employers, and any effort to try to get employees to sign overly restrictive agreements can actually result in a fine and penalty. My company sent me a legal agreement saying that by signing the doc and continuing to be employed, I agree to waive my state's protections against non-competes. As if... that would hold up in any court, ever.
It's a blatantly illegal clause and I could have fought it at the time... but in the end I knew it was totally unenforceable at worst. I'll go after them for the penalty if they ever try to enforce it, or if I leave under bad circumstances. It was more valuable to me to have this document than it is for them to have it.
I wish I could give you a source but I recall this from college almost 20 years ago. If you read into “contract law” you will arrive there pretty quickly. It’s one of the main principles
I’m pretty sure iAnal is what the executives at Apple call the accounting department when they don’t get to expense their third pound of beluga kaviar.
I don't understand why these types of people come to the Fediverse if what they want is total control of their community and all interactions within it. Just create a closed message board with restricted sign-ups.
I don't think a lack of "total control" is the issue that OP is talking about. Regardless of how much control one wants to have over their instance, they still need the ability to effectively moderate illegal content.
OP didn't link their fuller report (the source for their statement is "trust me bro" I guess?), but the only mod tools required to moderate illegal content are objectively the delete and ban buttons, so they are already incorrect on that front. When these people talk about user safety (pay attention to the terminology), they mean "preventing all content that makes them uncomfortable from ever appearing on their screen". Then yes, Lemmy does not have those moderation features, because Lemmy's tools for this are blocking federation and restricting sign-ups. I agree that moderation tools on Lemmy need improvement but we need to read in between the lines here.
It think there are a lot of factors at play. Musk wants Twitter* to be an everything app and has mentioned plans to add e2e encryption to the dms. Telegram already had an iffy relationship to people who look for encrypted platforms so he probably wants to set up that idea to get people onto Twitter instead, especially as the right’s relationship to the platform is absolutely getting worse.
A big chunk of far right Telegram has moved off the platform recently after quite a few of the groups that got their start from anti-lockdown demos had members get arrested for terror charges. They seem to blame the fact that Telegram is backdoored but they constantly fed-post in open unencrypted channels anyone can read anyway. The police probably do monitor those channels but if I were to guess how they got caught, my bet is honestly that they just put in reports to the cops about each other because being fascists usually goes hand in hand with being horrible people.
I’m not sure how much he actually reads on far right Telegram but there is evidence of him at least following some channels where this sentiment can be seen. If I were to guess he saw oppotunity in bringing that audience back to Twitter.
Idk how secure telegram is but cmon signal is shady AF . They won’t let fdroid have it cause they want to sign their own keys or some shit but there is a speculation its because they can roll out custom apk to targets which governments want which is just not possible if it is hosted by someone like fdroid . Even telegram allows that and they even allow third party apps which signal won’t .
SimpleX and briar is the best option if your actually worried about privacy .
I do see it weird but publishing on F-Droid means almost nothing. If you are scared of their pre-built apks, compile from source instead. If Telegram and Signal are bad, use SimpleX.
I will throw shade at this liberal article writer by saying Elon Musk also promoted Signal. Does this make Signal actively compromised? Absolutely as much as Telegram.
This way of judgement of things is pure mental illness. I refuse to sugarcoat this, because now suddenly this Telegram vs Signal shitshow will become a trend if it is not nipped in the bud.
Signal/WhatsApp are different from Telegram/Discord. Former aim to be E2EE messengers while latter aim to be realtime public forums. Comparing apples to oranges is dumb, and falling for this Durov whining and counter-whining of Signal sheeps is even worse.
Let me ask Signal stans, since they are so proud of it, why is it that they kept delaying the username feature, and still require phone number to this day? Signal is not anonymous or private. Their servers are all Amazon and Google. What is private is the message contents, and even WhatsApp has that. Most people never even install Signal from their website’s APK, instead Play Store or Aurora frontend (same thing) or some APK website. So how is Signal this messiah? Matrix is a whole lot better, XMPP and SimpleX are even better. Briar is an extreme step further.
Is Meta ownership the singular thing that needs focus? Google, Facebook and Amazon are nearly equally evil, considering all of them are US military contractors. Other Big Tech companies are too, but Signal uses them as server hosts.
Consider the fact that a lot of probabilities that surface as criticism are valid, because Signal prioritised things like stickers, statuses and fucking MobileCoin crypto over username pseudonymity functionality, and even then you need the phone number. Do you know who did this since day one? TELEGRAM. Telegram has pseudonym username option to hide phone number from people from the very start. Signal did not have it for 9 years until recently.
Client is open source and you can use your own client with custom functionality if you like. I imagine nothing stops anyone from adding their own e2e implementations on top of it.
i know but neither encryption, nor foss clients matter much if it has to go through a closed server. thats kind of half the point of encrypting stuff. at least telegram supports it but cmon.
its like saying facebook is private because your browser is foss and you use https.
SSL on websites also is encryption. Still you can post your precious pictures “encrypted” via SSL for the whole world to see. I think everyone knew what was meant with encryption in this context.
I don’t think it has anything to do with the “right wingers.” I think many people and governments seek to discredit anything they can not control. Its basic misinformation tactics.
As far as Elon goes, he says crazy things and shouldn’t be believed.
They do this periodically. We saw it during Occupy, the Arab Spring, BLM, now Palestine (again). As a general rule, when folks go into the streets, the tighty righties start up the FUD.
There is a reason why spooks learn tradecraft - threat modeling, procedures, awareness, and techniques - more than they learn technology. It would behoove folks to to learn a little about that before hitting up the appstore.
Talks about other people creating FUD, then links to a post asserting telegram is compromised without citing any sources about anything discussed in the post. 🙄 FUD indeed.
I’m not saying it’s broken, but it has some design choices and functions that makes even Whatsapp a better choice for privacy minded people. Like rolling their own crypto and not having e2ee as default.
Anti-libre software, WhatsApp, bans us from proving it has E2EE, bans us from proving any of its claims and bans us from removing malicious source code.
Yeah sort of. I think those types of disorders get rewarded in many cases. It’s exceptionally profitable to exploit labor, mislead the public, and plunder the planet. When you have a conscience and empathy, that’s a lot harder to do, especially if you already enjoy a certain level of financial security.
Musk himself hasn’t actually provided any sources either, all his statements made on Twitter recently are basically pulled from thin air, almost like vague references
hachyderm.io
Hot