Your arguments don’t really make sense in the context of you asking for Threema instead, even if you acknowledge that it isn’t optimal.

[Signal] already showed that they'd like to keep the ecosystem locked down by not allowing 3rd party clients

Neither does Threema, it is a closed eco system? And in fact there is Molly, a hardened Signal fork for Android

At some point they will need a way to pay for their datacenters, […] i can see the pestering for donations getting much worse in the future.

Threema is a paid app though. So you consider an app asking for donations worse than a paid one? I agree though that their financials aren’t the best, since they seem to be living off a loan, but thats even more an argument to donate.

What does Ente mean? 

In Malayalam, Vishnu's native language, "ente" means "mine". Thus "Ente Photos" has the literal meaning "my photos".

This was a good name, but still Vishnu looked around for better ones. But one day, he discovered that "ente" means "duck" in German. This unexpected connection sealed the deal. We should ask him why he likes ducks so much, but apparently he does, so this dual meaning ("mine" / "duck") led him to finalize the name, and also led to the adoption of "Ducky", Ente's mascot Source

Misinformation is the inadvertent spread of false information without intent to harm, while disinformation is false information designed to mislead others and is deliberately spread with the intent to confuse fact and fiction. Source

This is more than a simple mistake and I am right to call it misinformation. I appreciate that you seem open to discussion about you being wrong. Nevertheless your post is still not edited to correct the proven wrong statements. You can use strikethrough so no context is lost, like I did in the comment you are replying to, where I was wrong.

You made a post with huge claims, basically saying that signal is unsecure and messages can be read by the goverment. This is such a big claim that it should have been researched by you beforehand and you should have provided sources. You don’t get to hide behind “discussions” because in a discussion you actually provide sources if you make claims. Especially if you are trying to start one, to give the readers a chance to read up on the topic.

You “getting a detail wrong“ has a huge impact. Some people will stumble upon this post, read that signal is supposedly insecure and might believe it and even spread that. It hurts the adoption of a secure encrypted messenger. It is not a small detail, but the foundation of your whole post.

And I am mostly right, I just seem to have been wrong on the detail about Signal push notifications. […] This comes from the DOJ senator Wyden saying these corporations can secretly share this data with governments and can include the unencrypted text which is displayed in the notification.

No, you are mostly wrong about the claims you make! Again your post made the connection to signal. Push notifications for Signal NEVER contain sensitive unencrypted data & do not reveal the contents of any Signal messages or calls–not to Apple, not to Google, not to anyone but you & the people you're talking to. Source

"spreading misinformation" is a phrase mostly used by feds when they see something they consider to be "wrong think" or not "politically correct". They use this anti-misinformation campaign to support their censorship and mass surveillance system.

I don‘t appreciate you, trying to frame my correction of your blatant misinformation as trying to censor you. Don‘t try to play the victim.

You are just spreading misinformation! Cite your sources!

There is a strategy used, which allows the government to find out who an account belongs to. They ask the push providers (Apple/Google) for data on the push token from e.g. a messaging app. This way they associate the account from an app with an identity.

Nothing there about message content. It is still safely E2EE.

~~I don’t know how it works in your country, but in mine, phone numbers are already associated with identities, so nothing gained as the gov can just ask signal for the phone number of an account, instead of having to ask signal and the push provider to get the identity.~~ (Edit: apparently it’s hashed, so there seems to be a use for this.) Signal isn’t about Anonymity but Privacy. There is a difference.

If you have another vulnerability cite it!

The discussion around this isn’t differentiated enough. Germanys foreign Minister has explicitly stated that what was exported, is stuff whose purpose is defensive in nature, e.g. Ground to air missiles. I can’t say if that is true, though there is some corroborating material. Nevertheless arms exports is too general as a category in my opinion.

Companies get extra data through Firefox

You mean extra data compared to them using any other advertising model, like google advertising? Do you have a source for that?

Because that is what PPA has to be compared to, and not to no ad measurement at all. It‘s meant to be replacing other advertising measurement techniques.

The comparison chart looks like it‘s copied from somewhere, would you mind sharing? I wouldn‘t mind a deeper dive into the topic.

I will say it again: The way i read it, it sounds like the companies will get some general data if their ads work, without a profile about you being created. I am fine with that.

Just imagine what a boon it would be for the “normal“ less tech savvy, if advertisers switched to a more privacy respecting technology like this.

If more privacy focused people don't like it, they can simply disable it by ticking one box, without negative consequences (unlike content blockers and similar techniques where a website can penalize you, turned off PPA is not detectable).

It has no downsides as far as I am concerned. It doesn’t give advertisers additional data that they wouldn’t already be able to get, it just creates the option of measuring their ads in a privacy respecting way.

Some SATA and NVMe devices support hardware encryption (TCG OPAL2 standard) and with the latest cryptsetup LUKS devices can be configured to use hardware encryption to encrypt the data either by itself or together with the existing dm-crypt software encryption. Support for this feature was added in the latest cryptsetup upstream release and we’d like to provide an option for users to use this feature when installing Fedora with disk encryption.

As this is an expert option, it will be available only through the kickstart interface. […] There will be two new options to select either hardware encryption only or hardware encryption in combination with software encryption (analogous to the --hw-opal-only and --hw-opal options used when configuring hardware encryption with cryptsetup).

I haven’t looked into the technicals much further than the support page.

The way i read it, it sounds like the companies will get some general data if their ads work without a profile about you being created. I would be fine with that. What I don’t like is the lack of communication to users about it being enabled.

PPA does not involve websites tracking you. Instead, your browser is in control. This means strong privacy safeguards, including the option to not participate.

Privacy-preserving attribution works as follows:

1. Websites that show you ads can ask Firefox to remember these ads. When this happens, Firefox stores an “impression” which contains a little bit of information about the ad, including a destination website.
2. If you visit the destination website and do something that the website considers to be important enough to count (a “conversion”), that website can ask Firefox to generate a report. The destination website specifies what ads it is interested in.
3. Firefox creates a report based on what the website asks, but does not give the result to the website. Instead, Firefox encrypts the report and anonymously submits it using the Distributed Aggregation Protocol (DAP) to an “aggregation service”.
4. Your results are combined with many similar reports by the aggregation service. The destination website periodically receives a summary of the reports. The summary includes noise that provides differential privacy.

This approach has a lot of advantages over legacy attribution methods, which involve many companies learning a lot about what you do online.

PPA does not involve sending information about your browsing activities to anyone. This includes Mozilla and our DAP partner (ISRG). Advertisers only receive aggregate information that answers basic questions about the effectiveness of their advertising.

This all gets very technical, but we have additional reading for anyone interested in the details about how this works, like our announcement from February 2022 and this technical explainer.

If you dont want to miss future announcements:

• With an Account on the forums you can get notifications if you turn them on for the “Announcement“ tag
• You can add https://universal-blue.discourse.group/tag/announcements.rss to your RSS reader

Saying that I dont trust a homophobe is not "sharing my political opinions". The lives of gay people may be affected by politics (just as we all are), but that doesn't mean homophobia (or being against homophobia) is a political opinion.

I couldn’t agree more with you👍🏼

I find it rather repulsive, that people would label “being against gay marriage” as “only holding an opinion”. It makes it seem so harmless. It is depriving people of the same rights that heterosexuals have. And that is why it might matter to people. It’s not just “any” opinion, like a view on how the economy should be regulated, where one could definitely argue about. But a view, which would deprive people of the same rights that others have, is not a valid opinion to have. There is no way that it can be respected. It’s the paradox of tolerance

In a comment further down you write the following: (Edit: the comment has since been removed by a mod)

You have the right to have a liberal opinion so why not let people have their own? It's like discrimination of black people at this point.

Which is quite ironic. You try to defend holding an opinion, which would discriminate against a certain group by not giving them the same rights. You argue that it’s discrimination to not respect their discrimination. In essence you ask the tolerant to respect the views of intolerant.