|
Top-level
 I’ve edited the CW in the original post to say “endorsing the police” instead of “collaborating with the police”. While I do think that them participating in such an event and being proud of it says a lot about their company’s morality and values, “collaborating” can be understood as “providing access to user data”, and I have no evidence that this is happening or planned. Matrix is still one of the best end-to-end encrypted standards we have. 4 comments
@scy I was using Element for connecting to Matrix chats but I had also grabbed another Matrix client bc Element wasn't supporting multiple Matrix accts (easy acct switching). I been trying to promote Matrix as an alternative to Telegram and Whatsapp, esp bc Matrix doesn't require signup with a phone number and might be better on privacy. The news of Element endorsing police/authority does have me :-/ right now. @scy they already developed strange solutions for the french government to break up e2e for audit and backup purposes. So yeah, I guess we dodged that bullet already years ago. @scy Ich finde es echt nice, dass die sich die Mühe machen mit vernünftigen OpenSource-Lösungen BigBusiness aus dem Behörden-Markt zu drängen. |
Gregory's Server
And, to quote myself from somewhere further down in the thread:
> While I still think that “we’ll legitimize, endorse & advertise for your event” counts as collaboration, I’ve now changed the CW to say “endorsing” instead of “collaborating with”. Not because my definition has changed, but to prevent people from getting the impression that Matrix is somehow becoming less secure because of that event.
I don’t distrust _Matrix_ because of it, but I certainly dislike _Element_ now.