I've heard a lot of commercials for Whatsapp lately, and they give
examples of women texting to someone, "My clothes tore. I'm trapped in
the ladies room, Help me" or "I'll be home soon, you can get in before I
get there with the key in the planter on the porch"

And their point is that if such transmissions are hacked it would be
dangerous to the sender, and they should use whatsapp that has end to
end encryption.

But if someone hacks a text is he going to know who sent it, or where
the porch/home is? And surely no one keeps watching someone's account
waiting for her to be trapped in the bathroom at work.

Are these things a real risk such that it's worth switching from the
built-in text app to whatsapp?

And why does whatsapp pay for advertising when they don't make any money
when someone uses the app anyhow?

On Fri, 11 Nov 2022 10:21:42 -0500, micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com>
wrote:

>I've heard a lot of commercials for Whatsapp lately, and they give
>examples of women texting to someone, "My clothes tore. I'm trapped in
>the ladies room, Help me"

What about the other six old ladies locked in the lavat'ry?

>or "I'll be home soon, you can get in before I
>get there with the key in the planter on the porch"
>
>And their point is that if such transmissions are hacked it would be
>dangerous to the sender, and they should use whatsapp that has end to
>end encryption.
>
>But if someone hacks a text is he going to know who sent it, or where
>the porch/home is? And surely no one keeps watching someone's account
>waiting for her to be trapped in the bathroom at work.
>
>Are these things a real risk such that it's worth switching from the
>built-in text app to whatsapp?

No, not as far as I'm concerned.

..
>And why does whatsapp pay for advertising when they don't make any money
>when someone uses the app anyhow?

On 11/11/2022 10:36 AM, Ken Blake wrote:

> What about the other six old ladies locked in the lavat'ry?

That micky is half the trolls on this newsgroup and others.
He's already ruined a few newsgroups (a.h.r for another).
Along with ken blake and philo and soyon and allen.
They're all the same micky time wasting troll.

Am 11.11.22 um 16:21 schrieb micky:
> I've heard a lot of commercials for Whatsapp lately, and they give
> examples of women texting to someone, "My clothes tore. I'm trapped in
> the ladies room, Help me" or "I'll be home soon, you can get in before I
> get there with the key in the planter on the porch"
>
> And their point is that if such transmissions are hacked it would be
> dangerous to the sender, and they should use whatsapp that has end to
> end encryption.
>
> But if someone hacks a text is he going to know who sent it, or where
> the porch/home is? And surely no one keeps watching someone's account
> waiting for her to be trapped in the bathroom at work.
>
> Are these things a real risk such that it's worth switching from the
> built-in text app to whatsapp?

Think about it one single minute and you will find out the answer
yourself. SMS is on all mobile phones. WA not even on half of the
population.

> And why does whatsapp pay for advertising when they don't make any money
> when someone uses the app anyhow?

--
Gutta cavat lapidem (Ovid)

Am 11.11.22 um 17:29 schrieb CDB:
> On 11/11/2022 10:36 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
>
>> What about the other six old ladies locked in the lavat'ry?
>
> That micky is half the trolls on this newsgroup and others.
> He's already ruined a few newsgroups (a.h.r for another).
> Along with ken blake and philo and soyon and allen.
> They're all the same micky time wasting troll.

Arlen. You need professional help very urgently.

--
Gutta cavat lapidem (Ovid)

micky wrote:
> I've heard a lot of commercials for Whatsapp lately, and they give
> examples of women texting to someone, "My clothes tore. I'm trapped in
> the ladies room, Help me" or "I'll be home soon, you can get in before I
> get there with the key in the planter on the porch"
>
> And their point is that if such transmissions are hacked it would be
> dangerous to the sender, and they should use whatsapp that has end to
> end encryption.
>
> But if someone hacks a text is he going to know who sent it, or where
> the porch/home is? And surely no one keeps watching someone's account
> waiting for her to be trapped in the bathroom at work.

I think the real use case for encrypted text is not these kind of
scenarios, but ones when you're facing off against hostile industrial or
government actors. Imagine texting some important details about your
factory or a customer, and a competitor intercepts it.

I don't know how much industrial espionage goes on today or the
capabilities of the actors, but I know in the past at least IBM was
getting their designs robbed by Fujitsu iirc.

>
> Are these things a real risk such that it's worth switching from the
> built-in text app to whatsapp?
>
> And why does whatsapp pay for advertising when they don't make any money
> when someone uses the app anyhow?
>

Whatsapp itself, I don't like because I have no idea how they fund,
which means the users are probably having their data sold somehow. Not
worth it IMO, unless you have espionage type concerns, in which case I
suspect there are better platforms like Signal to use.

--
David Solimano
david@solimano.org

On 2022-11-11 16:21, micky wrote:
> I've heard a lot of commercials for Whatsapp lately, and they give
> examples of women texting to someone, "My clothes tore. I'm trapped in
> the ladies room, Help me" or "I'll be home soon, you can get in before I
> get there with the key in the planter on the porch"

I don't understand what you are saying.

>
> And their point is that if such transmissions are hacked it would be
> dangerous to the sender, and they should use whatsapp that has end to
> end encryption.
>
> But if someone hacks a text is he going to know who sent it, or where
> the porch/home is? And surely no one keeps watching someone's account
> waiting for her to be trapped in the bathroom at work.
>
> Are these things a real risk such that it's worth switching from the
> built-in text app to whatsapp?
>
> And why does whatsapp pay for advertising when they don't make any money
> when someone uses the app anyhow?

--
Cheers, Carlos.

Am 11.11.22 um 20:57 schrieb David L. P. Solimano:
> micky wrote:
>> Are these things a real risk such that it's worth switching from the
>> built-in text app to whatsapp?
>>
>> And why does whatsapp pay for advertising when they don't make any money
>> when someone uses the app anyhow?
>>
>
> Whatsapp itself, I don't like because I have no idea how they fund,
> which means the users are probably having their data sold somehow. Not
> worth it IMO, unless you have espionage type concerns, in which case I
> suspect there are better platforms like Signal to use.

+1

--
Gutta cavat lapidem (Ovid)

In comp.mobile.android, on Fri, 11 Nov 2022 14:57:39 -0500, "David L. P.
Solimano" <david@solimano.org> wrote:

>micky wrote:
>> I've heard a lot of commercials for Whatsapp lately, and they give
>> examples of women texting to someone, "My clothes tore. I'm trapped in
>> the ladies room, Help me" or "I'll be home soon, you can get in before I
>> get there with the key in the planter on the porch"
>>
>> And their point is that if such transmissions are hacked it would be
>> dangerous to the sender, and they should use whatsapp that has end to
>> end encryption.
>>
>> But if someone hacks a text is he going to know who sent it, or where
>> the porch/home is? And surely no one keeps watching someone's account
>> waiting for her to be trapped in the bathroom at work.
>
>I think the real use case for encrypted text is not these kind of
>scenarios, but ones when you're facing off against hostile industrial or
> government actors. Imagine texting some important details about your
>factory or a customer, and a competitor intercepts it.
>
>I don't know how much industrial espionage goes on today or the
>capabilities of the actors, but I know in the past at least IBM was
>getting their designs robbed by Fujitsu iirc.
>
>>
>> Are these things a real risk such that it's worth switching from the
>> built-in text app to whatsapp?
>>
>> And why does whatsapp pay for advertising when they don't make any money
>> when someone uses the app anyhow?
>>
>
>Whatsapp itself, I don't like because I have no idea how they fund,
>which means the users are probably having their data sold somehow. Not
>worth it IMO, unless you have espionage type concerns, in which case I
>suspect there are better platforms like Signal to use.

It's great for international texting when the sim card one buys overeeas
doesn't include that. And mine never does, but also I almost never
text.

And it's great for video calling. When I travel, I've spent up to an
hour showing my ex-girlfriend what I'm seeing, the marketplace, the
local mall, the people I'm having dinner with. Last trip totalled maybe
5 hours, and all free**. Originally I showed this stuff to her to
encourage her to come with me on my next trip, even platonically, but
ironically, now I've shown her so much, she doesn't even need to come.

Skype does that too, and probably other things, but I've used Whatsapp.

**I remember when calling Pennsylvia to Indianapolis was 20c/minute so
this seems like a big deal. I didn't go overseas then but I'm told it
was about $3 a minute, and $3 was equal to 30 now. And that is voice
only, no pictures.

In comp.mobile.android, on Fri, 11 Nov 2022 21:15:21 +0100, "Carlos
E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

>On 2022-11-11 16:21, micky wrote:
>> I've heard a lot of commercials for Whatsapp lately, and they give
>> examples of women texting to someone, "My clothes tore. I'm trapped in
>> the ladies room, Help me" or "I'll be home soon, you can get in before I
>> get there with the key in the planter on the porch"
>
>I don't understand what you are saying.

These are sample texts that people might send, that the commercial is
suggesting would be intercepted. Then someone with bad intentions would
come to that bathroom** or that home***.

**Now that I'm writing this, coming to the bathroom would be really
stupid, since the intended receiver of the text, a female co-worker,
will also be there soon. Plus other random people. Not only that, why
does one have to wait until someone is stuck there? Just go to any
ladies room at any time and you may find a vulnerable woman there. Or
two.

***This one discloses where the door key is and if the interceptor of
the text gets there before either of the other people, he could rob the
place, but in this case two people are expected there and one who
doesn't work 9-5 might be arriving long before 5:30PM. One could just
go somewhere and break in.

These scenarios are silly. And describing them to you really made that
clear.

>> And their point is that if such transmissions are hacked it would be
>> dangerous to the sender, and they should use whatsapp that has end to
>> end encryption.
>>
>> But if someone hacks a text is he going to know who sent it, or where
>> the porch/home is? And surely no one keeps watching someone's account
>> waiting for her to be trapped in the bathroom at work.
>>
>> Are these things a real risk such that it's worth switching from the
>> built-in text app to whatsapp?
>>
>> And why does whatsapp pay for advertising when they don't make any money
>> when someone uses the app anyhow?

On 2022-11-12 02:47, micky wrote:
> In comp.mobile.android, on Fri, 11 Nov 2022 21:15:21 +0100, "Carlos
> E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 2022-11-11 16:21, micky wrote:
>>> I've heard a lot of commercials for Whatsapp lately, and they give
>>> examples of women texting to someone, "My clothes tore. I'm trapped in
>>> the ladies room, Help me" or "I'll be home soon, you can get in before I
>>> get there with the key in the planter on the porch"
>>
>> I don't understand what you are saying.
>
> These are sample texts that people might send, that the commercial is
> suggesting would be intercepted. Then someone with bad intentions would
> come to that bathroom** or that home***.

So somebody is doing commercials saying that text messages sent via
whatsap can be intercepted? Really?

Who is doing those commercials, and why, really? Are they promoting some
other type of text messaging that allegedly can not be intercepted?

Because SMS can also be perverted, it is not safe.

Or are the commercials saying that whatsapp is safer than SMS? And who
is making those commercials? And where?

Your post is not really clear.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> wrote:
> Am 11.11.22 um 17:29 schrieb CDB:
> > On 11/11/2022 10:36 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
> >
> >> What about the other six old ladies locked in the lavat'ry?
> >
> > That micky is half the trolls on this newsgroup and others.
> > He's already ruined a few newsgroups (a.h.r for another).
> > Along with ken blake and philo and soyon and allen.
> > They're all the same micky time wasting troll.
>
> Arlen. You need professional help very urgently.

<firmly sitting on hands>

micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
[...]

> Are these things a real risk such that it's worth switching from the
> built-in text app to whatsapp?

For normal day-to-day converstations, just use what your contacts are
using. Or switch, if you want features - pictures, video, audio,
<anything> -, which SMS doesn't offer.

In Europe, most people use WhatsApp and don't bother with SMS unless
they have to.

There are 'better' - more secure - alternatives to WhatsApp, but as so
few people use them, they're not practical for general use (unless all
your contacts are equally security-minded, which is unlikely).

[...]

On Fri, 11 Nov 2022 17:33:49 +0100, Joerg Lorenz wrote:

> Gutta cavat lapidem (Ovid)

Ovidius ;-)

--
s|b

s|b wrote:
> Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>> Gutta cavat lapidem (Ovid)
>
> Ovidius ;-)

Yeah, but translated from Greek.
Original from Choirilos of Samos:
πέτρην κοιλαίνει ῥανις ὕδατος ἐνδελεχείῃ
(hope this gets through unscathed)

And Covid isn't Covidius in Latin. :-)

-p

On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 13:32:03 +0100, Piet wrote:

> > Ovidius ;-)
> Yeah, but translated from Greek.

That, I did not know. But then the quote should be in Greek.

> Original from Choirilos of Samos:
> ?????? ????????? ????? ?????? ??????????
> (hope this gets through unscathed)

Not for me, unfortunately.
> And Covid isn't Covidius in Latin. :-)

Sure about that?

--
s|b