_8ysf

"In 2019, France’s best known climate expert sat down to work with its most feted graphic novelist. The result? Perhaps the most terrifying comic ever drawn.

Part history, part analysis, part vision for the future, World Without End weaves the story of humanity’s rapacious appetite for fossil fuel energy, how it has made possible the society people take for granted, and its disastrous effects on the climate.

Among French readers it was an immediate smash hit, selling more than 1m copies so far, becoming the country’s top-selling book in all categories in 2022 and hailed as “one of the most brilliant summaries of climate issues ever written”."

> That doesn't mean they're in plain text. MTProto 2.0 is an audited and robust algorithm.

Nope, but it means that they are not E2EE. Meaning that the Telegram server (and whoever has access to it) has plaintext access to the messages.

> You'd be right, if you had any proof of WhatsApp being E2EE in the traditional sense.

Fair point. Though last time I checked Telegram, nothing except the secret chats was end-to-end encrypted. So there I know that the features people like on Telegram are definitely not E2EE.

> The security is robust and the features and services are much better.

Features and services, I can accept that. Security... well again, only the secret chats are E2EE, and last time I checked, the secret chats didn't have more features than Signal.

The risk being that the experience will be miserable. I can totally imagine a world where you can talk between Signal and WhatsApp, but reactions don't work, sending files doesn't work properly, changing permissions in a group doesn't propagate, etc.

Unless you force everybody to use the exact same protocol, with the exact same features, and to never add or change a feature.

If you read my link above, WhatsApp literally told me that I could object to some data collection as per the EU regulations.

WhatsApp showed me a popup telling me that!

I think you totally missed the point. Let me rephrase it: as per the EU legislation, I got a popup in WhatsApp that was saying that I have a right to object to their data collection. I followed those links and got the e-mail above.

They are essentially telling me: "You need to put the right words in your e-mail if you want us to take you seriously, but we are counting on the fact that you don't, and therefore we work around your right to object".

Hence my question here. If somebody found a way to send the right words to WhatsApp and shared them, I could send the exact same e-mail. Or differently, if we could find a "good e-mail" to send and WhatsApp still refused to acknowledge it, then EU-based users could complain to the EU and possibly get the law with them.

I think it can move the needle.

The whole point of my question is that I want to see how far I can leverage the GDPR with WhatsApp. I do use other apps, but that is not the question :-)

I understand the idea (though I find Telegram worse than WhatsApp in that it's not even properly end-to-end encrypted).

But the idea here is really to see how far I can go about asking WhatsApp to not collect my data :-).

If they do, yes. But somehow I doubt it...

Man you have no clue how many people I moved to Signal. I actually contributed to Signal years ago. So respectfully, f** you (if you're going on that tone).

There are just some people that still keep WhatsApp, meaning I need it.

Sure, I just can't talk to my friends and family there :-).

Good point, I asked them that.

Well Signal Messenger is nice. I am using WhatsApp because of network effect: some people are on WhatsApp and not on something else (Signal is the most popular alternative where I am, Threema is third. Never heard of Veilid).