GigglyBobble
What a stupid thing to say.
Whatever your favorite (and probably shitty) proprietary or open source messaging service - not everybody uses it. But hey, everyone has email, so let's kill that.
BTW since you said encryption is important to you: your walled-garden messaging service has a much easier time profiling you and your friends than they would in a heterogenous environment like email. They don't need the content anyway, just metadata.
I don't think it'll be as easy as calculating SHA256 hashes, so ASICs as small as this might never be a thing.
On the other hand, brains do use orders of magnitude less power, so who knows.
Proprietary messaging is worse though. Email is interoperable and relevant as ever. Just nobody bothered to seamlessly apply PGP for encryption (probably spy agencies actively worked against that too).
TIL IT is volunteer work.
Interesting. I see it the other way around and believe it's only AR that'll be a real benefit (once it lasts indefinitely and is tiny or even implanted some time in the future). Pulling out your phone to navigate somewhere is cumbersome, for example.
I happily shelled out $600 for the first iPhone. But $3,500? For a V1 product that will get way better (and cheaper) in the next few years?
Cheaper? When has the next gen Apple product ever become cheaper?
According to the article, WhatsApp requires the Signal Protocol for message encryption.
Signal is the single third party that shouldn't have a problem with that since it's been using that protocol before WhatsApp adopted it, too (they hired Moxi himself to help them do it, remember?)
Since Signal also uses phone numbers as account ID, you'll give that to WhatsApp at least. Then they continue to track metadata of the messages sent between you and your WhatsApp contacts and will be profiling you.
I don't see how communicating with any Meta service isn't compromising privacy. I'm a Signal user and won't connect to WhatsApp.
It's not immoral to sell a business but anybody who actually has or even founded one and has an intact moral compass would not sell in a way you described.
You have a responsibility for your customers and employees and you don't just throw it into the dumpster like that because money isn't everything.
That's the superior approach and Firefox introduced it far earlier than Google addressed the problem.
Why OP is blindly arguing in that corp's favor and ignoring all the reasoning provided here, is beyond me. Shilling?