TIL about the 300 member signal groups that …

  • angband@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 hours ago

    That’s disingenous. Most other apps don’t promise cryptographically secure communications, for one. For the other, the man in the middle renders any purported security of signal moot, as I originally implied. So both disingenious, and begging the question. Logical fallacies typical of bad faith or poorly structured arguments.

    • Otter@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 hours ago

      I thought you were saying that signal is a worse secure messaging app compared to alternatives. Based on that, I said that this would affect other secure messaging apps too.

      Is your problem that people are promising secure communication apps while also making the apps available on the Play store?

      If so, then I can understand the argument around potentially misleading people by not warning them about it. However, that’s still different from the signal app itself being insecure. If you said that at the beginning, then we could all have saved some back and forth

      Logical fallacies typical of bad faith or poorly structured arguments.

      You’ve been so all over the place that it’s hard to address what you’re even talking about.