The headline made me sad but this comment made me laugh. If only all life's problems could be handled with simple engineering. With all the machinery you'd have to stuff everywhere, there'd be a lot more problems.
Not that my opinion matters, but just to document it: I at first thought this was a new project, something having to do with identity. I clicked, and saw some messy images like someone was playing in GIMP. I looked at the logo, and it wasn't a word, but it also made no technical sense. I tried to parse it, but it doesn't parse. This caused me to feel discord. Then I looked at the whole thing again, and said out loud, "What the fuck is that?"
Whatever it is, I don't like it. I didn't know Mozilla had an identity problem. I see at the top, the title, in all lower case is, "internet for people, not pr..." Hovering the title I see it's "not profit".
I'm sorry but that makes your identity worse to me. I remember the dinosaur looking head with "mozilla" wasn't particularly professional, but it didn't seem to matter. It was fine. This new one hurts my brain. The slogan sounds like something from a teenager trying to rebel. I don't even know what it means. Internet for people? That's what the internet is, for people. That tells me nothing about Mozilla, except that they don't want profit. Which makes it sound like they're going to fail, because that's not even a good attitude to have. You profit if you're producing value and sharing it with people in a fair way that people love.
This new identity seems to me like a grumpy uncool guy who is pissed he's uncool so decided his New Year's resolution was to change that. This is his makeover. His attempt to dress himself up and finally win the cool friends. But that tells me I wasn't enough as a friend. I've used Firefox forever. I never hated Mozilla, except I thought it was unfair when that CEO was forced to resign over his personal beliefs. I thought that was none of my business and nothing to do with the software. But I don't like words I c@n/t read. Micro$oft at least looks like a letter, please don't use s/ashes and co:ons in a w:0(o)r//d.
But whatever. Soon I'll go back to not caring like the dinosaur. I'll recognize it from the pattern and not try to read it. Nothing much will change. You are who you are, and a wardrobe and new attitude won't make you popular. But good luck.
It feels like Apple the PC is neglected for Apple the phone/tablet. If I'm looking for a mobile device, I'm looking at Apple. But for laptop and desktop, their offerings don't seem as great.
The cloud approach is making it less necessary to keep the PC within the Apple ecosystem. iOS devices already don't have expandable storage, and most data ends up being on iCloud or other internet services.
They did in another comment on this page. I do not see any evidence that worries me. Perhaps if you're a famous terrorist, you won't want to use it, because your GIF searches might expose your evil plans. But I only needed a way to talk to family and friends that was more private than Facebook and Google, while not sacrificing features and usability. I think Wire has done an excellent job. I've not found anything else that checks all the boxes.
Just wondering, but why not just use XMPP? You can choose any server that you like or trust, or run your own (on your own or third party infrastructure, up to you), and use OTR for end-to-end encryption if you feel you need to¹.
I have been using XMPP since 2000/2001. My current address is nine years old (and I control the server). I have a choice of clients on every platform that I use. All my contacts have the same set of choices regarding provider, accounts, and clients. As a bonus, not just my human contacts but also my infrastructure uses it for messaging and monitoring, so I can literally control some of my servers from my XMPP clients.
There must have been at least thirty major IM "solutions" going in and out of fashion during these 16 years. Individually, each might have been somehow "more convenient", but if start counting the cumulative migration effort, I'm not sure the convenience argument holds much water.
¹ I used it in anger once myself, initiated by one of my contacts. It was an interesting experience.
For one thing, XMPP does not have the same features. Try Wire and see for yourself. There's audio, video, voice messages, multiple device encryption. Maybe XMPP has improved, but it didn't work as well for mobile use.
> Is OTR really a practical option? You message seems unclear about it.
It depends on your threat model, like other alternatives.
I have never initiated an OTR session myself, but I have received one from a contact in anger (whistleblowing).
> Also, how do you get all your contacts to use XMPP
In my case, I have been using XMPP for the last sixteen years, so my contacts have "grown organically", to use an en vogue marketing term.
It appears that Mac computers come with an XMPP client preinstalled (and possibly pre-configured?) Linux, the same. Android, there are a number of clients available. Windows, I think there is Gajim, ...
As far as a stereotypical common user is concerned, they are quite happy to install whatever applications their peers are using, which is how they end up with so much cruft on their computers, phones, etc. :-)
> and your server?
Nobody needs to use my server. It is like email, you can use whichever provider you like.
You can't list a bunch of serious claims like the audio can be reconstructed with no additional information. There was a feud between the Signal people and Wire, so there is a lot of false info trying to smear Wire.
GIF searches are obviously going to use a 3rd party service, and nobody should expect some kind of anonymous encrypted channel for GIF searches. That's ridiculous.
I've not seen any lying about being open source. They haven't released every piece of code, but I don't recall them ever claiming they did. https://github.com/wireapp
I've never seen any crypto experts who have audited Wire and said there's anything wrong with their choices, and you supplied no links.
Between all the options, including Signal, I personally think Wire is best, and nothing you've provided has any reason to change that.
By proxying the encrypted request through another server, signal never sees the content of the request and giphy never gets the identity of the requester. I'm not sure that this is strictly necessary, but it certainly increases my confidence that the signal team are serious about their work.
> GIF searches are obviously going to use a 3rd party service, and nobody should expect some kind of anonymous encrypted channel for GIF searches. That's ridiculous.
There's tons of stuff like that which leaks in the app. They store your entire contact list server-side, your plaintext group membership, group info like plaintext group name and plaintext group avatar, etc etc.
> I've not seen any lying about being open source. They haven't released every piece of code, but I don't recall them ever claiming they did.
Since their launch several years ago, they've had a "feature" matrix on their website that lists Wire as being open source (and their competitors as not being open source). That was long before their recent "open source" announcement (which still isn't even fully open source). When pressed, they said it was because they used some open source libraries. That's really shady.
> I've never seen any crypto experts who have audited Wire and said there's anything wrong with their choices, and you supplied no links.
Thanks for trying, but it appears to me you're paranoid. The user directory in Wire is public. It is no secret that you're on there. They need information about whom you're connected to for the service to work. I'm not worried about GIF searches, or contact list. I'd prefer the contents of my conversations with family weren't archived on remote servers. Wire accomplishes that in the best way. It's a useless academic concern that audio level information would be in headers, and the paper you linked is of no relevance. I still see no reason why I'd not want to use Wire. For talking to family and friends in a reasonably private way we cannot get from using services from Facebook and Google, I think Wire is an excellent application.
> They store your entire contact list server-side, your plaintext group membership, group info like plaintext group name and plaintext group avatar, etc etc.
One has to remember that Signal also stores some social graph data, which is equally problematic.
I found no value in the first two seasons. It's been on the front page of HN at least 4 times in the past couple weeks. I tried watching the third season hoping it was better. It's still stupid. It's like they just take some very plain 1:1 observation about exactly how the world is right now, focus on one specific demographic, then create a skit around it that has no depth. They create imaginary worlds, but they're not very imaginative. They're basically exactly the world we're in, but they replace a few things with something slightly different. It's like science fiction for people who don't really like science fiction.
It's shallow intellectually, but it doesn't even have any depth emotionally. At least with most other popular TV shows there's depth in terms of personal relationships. There's drama that's more emotionally interesting. Black Mirror seems to be optimized for people who are blunted both in terms of intellect and social emotion. It's one of the most boring TV series on Netflix, which is a shame because there's not much else that even attempts to be interesting in a more sci-fi way.
I think the only reason why people find value in Black Mirror must be because of references. Like how they love jokes on Reddit when they refer to something they all know. People must be like, "Ahaha, they're referencing how people are always on their phones. So true. LOL look, it's trollface!! Dude, look, trollface is on TV. I know trollface. Haha this show is great." What else would people be getting out of it?
I'm not sure if we've been watching the same show. I finished watching the first season this week, and Black Mirror does an amazing job of building characters and forming relationships in a short amount of time.
It does this well because the science fiction elements of the show are not the focus. They are merely instruments for driving very human narratives.
When you say It's shallow intellectually, but it doesn't even have any depth emotionally. At least with most other popular TV shows there's depth in terms of personal relationships. There's drama that's more emotionally interesting. I wish you would use an example so I can understand where you're coming from since I find myself completely on the other side of your comment.
Branding? I think it's basically an Ensure for geeks. "Soylent Green" is from an old science fiction. I seem to recall Soylent being started on Reddit years ago. They call a recipe "open source", and it grew inside a group of internet culture.
It's like how "Gatorade" was neon colored and marketed for athletes, when the same kind of formula was also used for less glamorous rehydration.
Instead of being packaged like Slimfast is, where it becomes part of weight loss culture, Soylent is targeted at hacker types. It fits. They're supposed to always be working and have no time for cooking, and it has a futuristic image, so they integrate with it.
When really, you're right, it's basically the same thing as Slimfast.
I didn't read those, but I think there's a slight difference between Soylent and other meal replacement drinks, mainly in the purpose. Slimfast is for people who only use them to lose weight. Ensure is for people who only use them because of illness. Soylent is for people who want to transcend humanity to sustain life without the hassle of ingestion.
I get it. I'd love to bypass eating. But I think it's naive. When I saw the people getting excited over it on Reddit many years ago, I rolled my eyes. Nutrition is not so simple and understood where you can mix some ingredients in batch, then drink your meals quickly without thought. You can get away with it for a while, especially if you're young. But it's really a science fiction fantasy, and I thought the people buying into it were naive at best, and being scammed at worst.
Just like I think believing you need Slimfast to lose weight, or that it's a smart approach is equally naive. People want simple programs to follow though, and it's opportunity for businessmen to capitalize on the desire.
I am too. I hear people describing it where it sounds like something I'm supposed to like. But I watched all the previous episodes, and they were all stupid. I saw no depth. It was like a shallow version of that genre, which did have some depth in other shows I've seen in the past.
Maybe I'm too out of touch with the culture to realize the meaning. But I think it's probably just shallow, and superficially appeals to people who don't usually think very deeply about related topics. Like Star Trek. A lot of people love that show, but from what I recall, it looked like a shallow soap opera for nerds. I think some people probably like Black Mirror more as a fashion accessory, because the idea of it fits their style better than some others.
But I will watch the new season, and maybe there's new writers and I'll find something interesting.
You:
Black Mirror = "stupid"
Star Trek = "shallow soap opera for nerds"
Me:
Black Mirror = genius
Star Trek = (TNG-era) brilliant, formed much of my values and views of the world
I really, honestly would like to study the way you (and people who share your opinion) think vs. the way I (and people who share my opinion) do. The way you argue against Black Mirror / Star Trek suggests some fundamental difference in understanding the world - things that for you are obviously stupid are for me obviously brilliant.
I would be grateful if you could elaborate on what you think was shallow in Black Mirror vs. other shows you saw, and what made you dislike Star Trek. I'm very curious where does that difference in perceiving those shows come from.
Do you (or does anyone) know if the wire protocol is open source as well? I see from their website that some of the apps are...but not sure of the protocol...? Because if so, then "someone" could technically retrofit it to "allow decentralization someday".
