I said in my comment that the fact that they’re not FLOSS is an issue.
I think we may be on the same page, then.
Not everything that isn’t FLOSS is a conspiracy to get your data
This is why I think framing free software as a privacy issue is inherently flawed. Free software is a good thing because it gives you control over your technology. The fact that free software is generally more privacy respecting is probably a side effect of that, but some proprietary software companies at least nominally claim to respect privacy too. Discord can have the best privacy policy in the world, and actually stand by it, and I would still denounce it because it is a locked-down proprietary silo platform.
similarly not everything that is FLOSS takes proper care of your data
This is technically true, in that a free software license is not a magical ward against bugs or spyware, but in cases where a free software project becomes spyware - such as Audacity - a spyware-free fork often pops up soon after. This is why I value the four freedoms of the free software movement.
Discord can have the best privacy policy in the world, and actually stand by it, and I would still denounce it because it is a locked-down proprietary silo platform.
I agree, but claiming that it uses it’s users chat history for selling advertisement is absolutely unfounded and is not valid criticism.
I agree with you that FLOSS doesn’t mean automatically better and there is no reason to wear a tinfoil hat. You ultimately have to trust someone if you don’t inspect the source code yourself. I was just saying that being revolt centralized and having access to every information isn’t the best design for a discord privacy-respecting alternative, but they do have a good privacy policy, so if you trust they respect it (atm no reason to doubt that) then it will be surely better than discord.
Discord does collect chat history though. On discord privacy policy:
Information You Provide: We collect information from you when you voluntarily provide such information, such as when you register for access to the Services or use certain Services. Information we collect may include but not be limited to username, email address, and any messages, images, transient VOIP data (to enable communication delivery only) or other content you send via the chat feature.
They don’t say that they sell said information to advertisers (even if they send some data to third parties) and I don’t have seen any report about them getting caught doing that, I’m sorry I assumed.
But I admit I get a bit carried away with doubts about companies who offer closed source software to a very large userbase. If there is a chance of making more money, they usually take it.
We’re on the same page. FLOSS and decentralized/standardized is pretty much always better.
I understand that it’s easy to make the assumption. Discord is one of the very few software of the kind that doesn’t use data for advertisement according to their privacy policy. The data is there though, and the fact that they don’t allow users to easily delete it is concerning. But the fact that its used for advertisement is false, which initially surprised me.
Re-reading my comments I realise I might have been unnecessarily aggressive sorry.
I think we may be on the same page, then.
This is why I think framing free software as a privacy issue is inherently flawed. Free software is a good thing because it gives you control over your technology. The fact that free software is generally more privacy respecting is probably a side effect of that, but some proprietary software companies at least nominally claim to respect privacy too. Discord can have the best privacy policy in the world, and actually stand by it, and I would still denounce it because it is a locked-down proprietary silo platform.
This is technically true, in that a free software license is not a magical ward against bugs or spyware, but in cases where a free software project becomes spyware - such as Audacity - a spyware-free fork often pops up soon after. This is why I value the four freedoms of the free software movement.
I agree, but claiming that it uses it’s users chat history for selling advertisement is absolutely unfounded and is not valid criticism.
I agree with you that FLOSS doesn’t mean automatically better and there is no reason to wear a tinfoil hat. You ultimately have to trust someone if you don’t inspect the source code yourself. I was just saying that being revolt centralized and having access to every information isn’t the best design for a discord privacy-respecting alternative, but they do have a good privacy policy, so if you trust they respect it (atm no reason to doubt that) then it will be surely better than discord. Discord does collect chat history though. On discord privacy policy:
They don’t say that they sell said information to advertisers (even if they send some data to third parties) and I don’t have seen any report about them getting caught doing that, I’m sorry I assumed. But I admit I get a bit carried away with doubts about companies who offer closed source software to a very large userbase. If there is a chance of making more money, they usually take it.
We’re on the same page. FLOSS and decentralized/standardized is pretty much always better.
I understand that it’s easy to make the assumption. Discord is one of the very few software of the kind that doesn’t use data for advertisement according to their privacy policy. The data is there though, and the fact that they don’t allow users to easily delete it is concerning. But the fact that its used for advertisement is false, which initially surprised me.
Re-reading my comments I realise I might have been unnecessarily aggressive sorry.