Signal could still (at least for a short period of time) read everything. Whisper System just has to push a Signal Update that no longer encrypts. It would probably be noticed pretty soon. And no not because of the source code. The source code is what they claim to ise to build the applications but they could easily apply patches before they build. You’d have to reverse engineer the compiled applications ro see if there is code that’s probably not in the source.

This kind of problem is typically way smaller in projects that actively encourage building the clients from source yourself - which Whister System/Signal does not.

Facebook added the encryption in the first place because so many people were leaving for Signal and Threema (and Telegram but that’s another security nightmare).

Why not save a step, fuck bitlocker, and use veracrypt to encrypt your drive in the first place?

Maybe cloudflare DNS 1.1.1.1?

I use my remarkable 2 for that. Pretty expensive compared to other typically ebook readers but I use it to take notes too and it’s basically a pen and paper replacement for me.

First, could be autocorrect, and second: How many languages do you speak FFS?

Any backups of the repository itself (and not the GitHub rendering)?

I used keepass since ages and about two years ago I switched to a self-hosted vaultwarden instance and I still think it was a great choice. So of you have a docker experience and a little VM lying around you could give vaultwarden/Bitwarden a try.

Thank you for taking the time to read it and your feedback.

Your replies here come off as pretty condescending.

That was definitely never my intention but a lot of people here said something similar. I should probably work on my English (I’m not a native speaker) to phrase things more carefully.

You shouldn’t just say “did you read the article” and then “it’s in this section of the article”

It never crossed my mind this could be interpreted in a negative way. I tried to gauge if someone read it and still disagreed or if someone didn’t read it and disagrees, because those situations are two different things, at least for me. The hint with the sections was also meant as a pointer because I know that most people won’t read the entire thing but maybe have 5min on their hand to read the relevant section.

I tried to make the title the exact opposite of clickbait. There are no unanswered questions on purpose. No “Find out if a kilobyte is 1024 bytes or 1000 bytes”. I think people are smart enough that I not just reiterate for 20min why a kilobyte is 1000 bytes but instead go into more details.

The main problem is probably that people won’t sacrifice 20min of there time on something they are not sure if it’s a good read but the only thing I can do is trying to encourage them to read it anyway.

There are not ads, no tracking, no cookies, no login, no newsletter, no paywall. I don’t benefit if you read it. I’d like to clear up misconceptions but I can’t force people to read it.

Pretty obvious that you didn’t read the article. If you find the time I’d like to encourage you to read it. I hope it clears up some misconceptions and make things clearer why even in those 60+ years it was always intellectually dishonest to call 1024 byte a kilobyte.

You should at least read “(Un)lucky coincidence”

It’s true that the actual “story” is very short. 1 kB is 1000 bytes and 1 KiB is 1024 bytes. But the post is not about this, but about why calling 1024 a kilobyte always was wrong even in a historical context and even though almost everybody did that.