I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make here. You start by agreeing that telegram is simply not private. Then you move on to implying that it must be, because the CEO got arrested?
How does that change the fact that it is, by your own assessment, not private?
To answer your question, the answer from my perspective is quite simple. Noncompliance. If telegram had complied to local laws, like the others have and continue to do, he would not have gotten in trouble.
I’m still confused about people who consider telegram a private chat.
It’s easy to verify for yourself that it isn’t, so how is this still going around?
Definitely an american thing. I always find it annoying when I travel there. Also, bringing the bill with desert. Let me finish my meal first before giving me hints to get the fuck out
I don’t run as root because I’ve always been told I shouldn’t. I don’t know enough about anything to be contradicting stuff like this. It has always seemed weird to me that we don’t run as root and then just sudo everything, though.
What is the reason we don’t run as root?
This is just a proposal. It’ll take years to pass into a law/directive (if it ever does). I’d say now is probably a decent time to visit, in case it does go forward
Thank you for the name, but I don’t know who he is so I don’t understand the joke
I think they’re trying to say that the amount of brownie is dictated by the amount of batter you have, and you can use one tray as many times as necessary to use up all the batter
Not much of this makes sense. Maybe we don’t have an equal understanding of private. If thats the case, this discussion is going nowhere.
I will point out, though, that this is particularly nonsensical
Telegram doesn’t use encryption. Everything is in clear text. Nobody needs a back door to get access. Not even governments. It’s all just out in the open