Re: Messed up Email
On Thu 24 Jun 2021 at 14:04:13 -0400, Celejar wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Jun 2021 01:25:37 +0300
> Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mi, 23 iun 21, 17:12:07, Michael Grant wrote:
> > > > Apparently the lines are blurry enough for you to include Signal in that
> > > > list.
> > >
> > > Why? Not blurry at all. Signal is just as closed a system as
> > > WhatsApp. Maybe more private, but unless you know something I don't,
> > > Signal doesn't talk to anything other than other Signal. Puppeted
> > > bridges are not interoperability, as far as I am aware, all users
> > > still need to be on Signal.
> >
> > You seem to be using a completely different meaning of 'proprietary' (no
> > federation) than I do (closed source software, proprietary protocol that
> > must be reversed engineered, patents, etc.).
>
> Well, Michael's original post that you challenged contrasted:
>
> > a standards based system such as mail or the web and a proprietary
> > system such as facebook, WhatsApp, Signal, Telegram, etc etc.
>
> Would you call Signal "a standards based system?" I understand that the
> software itself is open source, and the project does publish various
> "Signal Protocal" libraries, but I'm not sure that's quite enough to
> call it "standards based."
Michael was desperately trying to sustain his argument that
> email is NOT gmail and let's not forget this.
Gmail is standards-based. I expext Signal is too; otherwise it would not
work.
standrds-bsaed != free.
--
Brian.
Reply to: