HeartyBeast

OK. Personally, I'm quite interested in it from the opposite point of view. I'm working with a large public body in the UK, who currently use Twitter and I'm attempting to get them interested in setting up their own Mastodon instance as an alternative. (Twitter embeds don't work on their public websites any more).

Having the potential ability to reach Threads users is certainly helping me persuade them about thinking about the move to Mastodon - and not Threads.

It's a bit of polemic that suggests that the main reason for blocking Threads is that is full off appalling hateful content. I haven't used Threads since in initially signing up, so I had a quick look and it wasn't particularly toxic, as far as I can see. If it is - and that content comes across, that is of course good reason for instances to block it - and I'm sure they will. Meanwhile I was amused to see on Threads the same debate been handled from the opposite direction:

Zuckerberg requesting and being given the your intimate personal information, isn't really the same as s Zuckerberg plan to make information on a Meta social network readable from another social network, but sure. I'm not saying Meta is trustworthy, I'm saying let's see what they do. Having a way for people to interact with people on Threads, without having to join Threads could be quite useful.

Wait a see what they actually do. Mad idea, I know.

I think this should be in mildlyjoyous, surely?

No, the article is clear evidence that they are imperfect - not that they don't generally care about user privacy. In general the work they have done on privacy has been pretty good. Apple mandating end-to-end encryption might be something that they sholuld have done - and that's a reasonable criticism, but it looks like it is possible for individual app makers to encrypt their notifications: . There's syill the metadata, of course.

If I am being paid to shill for Apple they are being particularly tardy with their payments. But to answer your question, no - I'm a user who is privacy conscious and thinks Apple does a reasonable job.

I am, however always interested in knowing about where they are falling down so I can mitigate. General handy wavy accusations don't really help me practically - or indeed anyone.

That’s a claim. You haven’t given any tangible evidence that it’s a lie, you just talk in handywavy generalities

Go and have a chat with them. Perhaps as a half joke buy them a really nice pair of slippers for Christmas.

As an aside, I did once share an upstairs flat with a woman who had a prosthetic leg. We had wooden floors. The people downstairs were not amused, though she tried to move around as quietly as possible

So rather that talking in generalities what specific lies have they told about respect for privacy?

Hang on - what exactly did they lie about?

That sounds like a cracking idea, the suggestion is that something in Apple's ToS prevents this generally - but is that the case, if Signal manages it?

Signal sends notifications via Apple's push notification servers. So I'm still not quite clear what are suggesting. That apps run continuously in the background. each doing real-time polling of their respective servers for notifications? Because your battery ain't going to last long.