Why aren't people using openstreetmaps? Why are they so dead set in contributing to closed data?

I ain't seen a Norton like this since Primal Fear!

Aylo’s lawsuit does not challenge SB 73’s provision prohibiting the websites covered by the law from sharing information about VPNs.

So mentions of VPNs on their websites still have to be policed?

Lol

That's a hell of a combo for fucking other people's countries up.

Eastern Europe and North Africa are in absolute tatters because of those two.

Open source means you can audit how the application transfers data. Of course you can't audit parts of infrastructure and data retention, but you would be able to know if they're using an outdated dependency or if they're not using a good encryption algorithm if they're running an open source project.

Telegram (also known as Telegram Messenger) is a Russian-Emirati ... instant messaging (IM) service. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telegram_(software)

Enough said. Anyone who uses this service is a tool of the lowest level. I've had better screwdrivers.

Yes, but open backend means you can self host

That's all they are willing to share publicly. They could easily extract any normal 1:1 chat history, etc. Normal chats aren't end-to-end encrypted.

So that's all they had on him? Or all the gov asked for?

I will have to re-visit telegrams privacy policy at some point, but aren't they known for storing quite a lot of info (at least when compared to other private messengers like Signal?)

From a purely opsec standpoint, it doesn't really matter whether the backend is open source or not. Either way you can't know what kind of data is being shared and whether metadata is being deleted or not. What actually matters is that the client is open source and thoroughly reviewed by independent 3rd parties. With a good messaging app, it shouldn't matter what runs on the server. And it is known that Telegram's client uses some weird in-house crypto and doesn't encrypt chats by default.

This is why I'm not going to ditch Threema, even though its backend isn't open source. I think they have a solid business model, which is why I support them. I still prefer Signal though.

thats cool

I'm still not going to use a platform with a closed source back end.

Whats the schedule on a usable spreadsheet? Or a word doc that canbe edited on mobile

It's the least terrible free email provider.

Less of an issue. The network effect is very real

If you're stupid enough to have a chatgpt account obviously.

Noo hecking I was supposed to be the one violating people's privacy! How could Facebook do this to me???

why change the title?

If you're confused, perhaps you should read how monopolies work...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly#:~:text=can%20drive%20or-,buy%20out,-other%20companies.%20A

I'm trying to understand your thinking. I don't see the evil in buying a company to learn what they know. Buying standard notes resulted in proton docs, but standard notes is still there. Simplelogin is still there. I don't see how they are "destroyed".

Let's turn our attention back to "what about Proton's business model is evil", where I told you two evil things Proton did that apparently aligned with its business model: Destroying two competitors.

The only apparent defense you have for these two evils is to say a different thing is not apparently evil (vendor lock-in?) but a lack of evil does not absolve evil . I'd rather focus on that than being dragged down into a pedantic debate about which types of Proton emails really do lock users in (as anyone who has ever signed up for a website with an email address will tell you, it does).

Can you provide an example of a corporation that you can prove is good and will not turn bad in the future?

Again, you're coming from the position that Corporation is good until proven bad, a position that I thought everyone was shown, time and time again, is a bad position.

Every time someone says 'bad actor' I immediately think of Nicolas Cage, I would rather not.