undefined | Better HN

0 pointsyalok1d ago0 comments

it doesn't necessarily have to be tied to monetization & privacy directly.

It may just be that ROI doesn't make sense: very few user out there truly care about (or even understand) E2EE, for quite some users it creates an inconvenience & support incidents (harder to move from device to device, forgot your passphrase - lost your history, new joiners to a group chat don't see previous history, etc), it requires a significant additional engineering effort to just maintain it, many new features get shipped much slower because of it...

0 comments

mtlmtlmtlmtl1d ago

It doesn't have to be, but that's not really an argument for claiming it isn't. Considering how deeply embedded privacy violation is in Meta's corporate DNA, is there any reason other than hilariously naïve and inexplicably charitable, hypothetical speculation to believe this is not motivated by more privacy violation for profit, just like literally every single thing Meta has done in the entire history of the company? No? Didn't think so.

yalokOP1d ago

were you in that room where Adam was making that call? No? didn't think so...

Just give people some benefit of doubt. There're much simpler ways to explain certain things that suspecting some universal evil in every move...

mfru1d ago

not if it is one of the companies famous for going the extra mile of being "evil" / a corporate shit hole stealing every thought you ever have to better sell you stuff you don't need

tylerchilds1d ago

From talking to people from Meta, they don’t believe in E2EE because “it’s decrypted on the other end” which they take as “becomes insecure in exactly the way we’ve designed the sausage factory”

They’re a bit of a self fulfilling prophecy for why it is a futile effort for trying to secure information near them.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse