89 karma · joined April 7, 2013
WhatsApp instead is their chat app for users how don't like Facebook. WhatsApp has way more users than Facebook Messengers. And now they have the PR and even don't have to deal with wiretapping requests anymore.
When Android backups Wifi passwords, those are encrypted with your Google password that Google has only a hash of. Okay, it's easily interceptable the next time you login and Google has an warrant. But still an option.
But those cases are only saying that companies can't comply to disclosure requests. That doesn't say if the encryption itself is weak or if the user has to completely trust that company. Just like the Apple case, where a 4-6 digit PIN is basically protected by Apple's secret firmware and its signing infrastructure.
There is nothing worse than a messenger that is commonly called secure but actually isn't (like the current implementation at WhatsApp). Cryptocat already had a massive disaster related to this problematic. Known as the chat program for activists in danger, it had a mathematical bug that made it nearly as weak as cleartext. Another one: As long as people aren't always explicitly using Secure Chats, Telegram isn't more secure than WhatsApp and doesn't use any end-to-end encryption. Still hyped for its security. While secure clients can definitely exist, most of the famous everyday solutions are just FUD and bullshit.
Not sure if just broken or they are using a different SMS gateway that has a problem with my country. It also doesn't really help that 2FA is still only known as hardware tokens within their documentation. It doesn't raise any trust for the PayPal website either.
Well, Google Code was never used for private repositories, so that argument is irrelevant for the intended free private repository introduction.
For me it's rather an expression of ignoring that websites are always slightly differently displayed than a good solution.
> UPDATE (2014-09-06): As […] was the first to point out, RFC 7217 addresses all of my issues with “privacy” addresses. Let implementation come soon!
So, not backing your message.
> 1. Early-stage startup teams cannot afford to handle the hardware fragmentation that plagues Android.
You have a full stack of iOS devices, too, maybe even more expensive. It's a point if you develop quite near hardware features or want to do pixel-perfect designs without auto-layout, but that's difficult for iOS, too, these days. A messenger app is really not that device specific.
> 2. Study after study demonstrates iOS users are not only growing in key geographies, but are more valuable customers.
If it's about hype and money, you might be right, but if you just need users with a much more social diversity, Android is likely on your side.
> 3. iPhone 5c and future low cost models will likely steal share from Android relative to yesterday. Dunno. You say "likely", too, so why is that even considered as a top 3 argument?
Nevertheless, the most important point here is: It's a messenger. For teams. You don't want split between iOS and Android devices and Talko itself sees this as negative point:
> (The corporate beta testers I spoke with sighed wistfully when reporting that a couple of team members could not participate because they didn’t use iPhones.) “We can’t build a business on this until we have all of the above,” says Ozzie, who wanted to make sure his engineers aced the iPhone first; [...]
iMessage's strength is its SMS fallback (still, who wants to send expensive text messages these days), but Facebook, WhatsApp etc. are generally much more used.
How does bundling mean combining it into an _executable_ file? Sure, this could be the case for an installer, but that one could also just download/copy the files.
While the chat function is maybe more of a tech demo, it could be used in places with bad network coverage or at big events where the network is gone down for whatever reason. Also interesting for geolocated services, because you don't have to send your position to a central entity, so interesting for some privacy concepts.
Since the life time end of normal XP (not even the embedded version), those "XP will doom our money" news spawn everywhere for no good reason.
TL;DR: It's primary a hardware design issue.
When successfully started Android, you should be able to access it by long-pressing the power button to get into a popup menu, then long-tapping on the power off text button there. Also different hardware key combinations might work while booting.
Also, just speculative, Android itself might detect a boot loop or crashes while booting and then automatically restart into safe mode.
That attack is then annoying and might cause device wipes due to not knowing that option, but looks not that blocking then. Google might also filter that attack by looking for that in their Google Play app check routine.
It could be a browser feature in the future to sandbox those webcam data so that it's only transfered to a specific opponent. That has some problems to solve and is just a raw thought.