BETTER THAN SIGNAL? Interview With Session Co-founder Kee Jefferys скачать в хорошем качестве

BETTER THAN SIGNAL? Interview With Session Co-founder Kee Jefferys

Session co-founder thinks Session is more private than Signal. What arae his arguments? Support my 100% independent work at:   / thehatedone   This was my interview with the Session CEO Kee Jefferys. Session Messenger: https://getsession.org/ "Session is an end-to-end encrypted messenger that minimises sensitive metadata, designed and built for people who want absolute privacy and freedom from any form of surveillance." Session Technology Foundation: https://session.foundation/ Session Whitepaper: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2002.04609 TIMESTAMPS 00:00 Intro 07:56 Why are you doing this? 12:00 What is the worst case scenario if Session was forced to give out user data? 14:45 How can Session resist orders to compromise end-to-end encryption? 24:00 How can Session defend against nation-wide censorship request and global adversaries? 28:27 What is Session's best feature and why Signal's phone number requirement is a great vulnerability 31:44 Why should people use Session over Signal? 34:49 How and why is cryptocurrency implemented in Session? 41:10 Why would we need Session's incentivization scheme when Tor has been running voluntarily for decades? 47:30 How is Session enforcing that node operators are sufficiently decentralized? 49:45 Isn't cryptocurrency in a private messenger introducing too much regulatory attention? 53:18 How is Session making money? 57:40 Dissing Signal - Is Signal really sustainable? 1:03:00 What is Session's priority right now? 1:05:05 What is Session's non-profit structure? 1:14:45 Authoritarian surveillance laws in democratic countries (Australia, UK and more) 1:25:30 Is defense all we can do against mass surveillance? 1:30:34 Things will get worse before they get better... 1:32:50 Trying to convince Kee to get Session on Accrescent app store 1:35:29 Solutions exist and they are worth it! Follow me:   / the_hatedone_     / thehatedone   The footage and images featured in the video were for critical analysis, commentary and parody, which are protected under the Fair Use laws of the United States Copyright act of 1976.