It seems really cool but I’m a bit wary of it due to the crypto stuff.

  • jet@hackertalks.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 months ago
    • The claim to not have user IDs is misleading at best, and outright false in group chats.

    I’m in a group chat but I’m unable to send a direct message to a group member, that’s annoying, but would substantiate the claim that they don’t have general user IDs.

    • mox@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Their queue IDs are user IDs. Each one points to a specific user. You can call it a queue ID, or an account ID, or a user ID, or an elephant, but that doesn’t change what it is.

      They crate a different ID to share with each contact in 1:1 chats, but that doesn’t make them anything less than user IDs. You can do the same thing on any other chat service by creating a different account to reveal to each contact. (This is obviously easier to manage on clients that support multiple accounts, but again, that doesn’t change what the IDs do.)

      And in group chats, they don’t even do that; they reveal the same ID to all group members.

      • ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Do I understand it correctly that the queue ID is specific to the group chat? How is that a user ID, then? The point is that the user doesn’t have an ID, and so you can’t find them in any other group chats unless they have introduced themselves. It basically only identifies the destination, and you really can’t avoid that, can you? Well, unless all messages are basically broadcasts, and everyone receives them, generating unimaginably larger traffic