so wats the catch with this thing? ie, whats preventing ekhm. highly illegal content from running the chats?
They're pretty good. I recommend it if you need voice/video calls and to include crApplel iToddlers. I, being a GrapheneOS chad, recommend Briar or Cwtch for messaging and GNU/Jami for 1-on-1 or group voice/video. SimpleX is adequate for iToddler-inclusive messaging+voice/video (1-on-1).
is it really called SIMPLEX? the medical term?
>>110233082Pronounced Simple-Ecks, not Simp-Lecks.
>>110233082the branding really sucks, the author should've come up with something better
>>110233014Their bot can join any group chat that got reported and check for illegal content. That's how they handle reports.https://simplex.chat/blog/20250114-simplex-network-large-groups-privacy-preserving-content-moderation.html#preventing-abuse-with-anonymous-participation
>>110233104>Privacy-preserving content moderation>Right now, when we act on user complaints, we delete uploaded files or the links to join the groups from our servers, and to the users it looks as if something stopped working.>We are currently rolling out the change to the servers that would mark these files and group links as blocked, so that users who try to download them or to join blocked groups can see that they were blocked for violating server operator conditions of use. This will improve transparency of moderation and reliability of the network.>Later this year we plan to do more than that — client-side restrictions on the clients that violated conditions of use by uploading prohibited content.>How would it work? When the client discovers that the uploaded file was blocked, it may, optionally, depending on the information in the blocking record, disable further uploads from the app to the servers of the operator that blocked the file. Also, when the client that tried to receive the file sees that the file is blocked, it may also refuse to receive further files from the same group member via the same servers.>In this way, the servers can restrict the future actions of the users who violate the conditions of use, while preserving privacy and security of the users and content – even of those users who violated the conditions.>We discussed this plan with the users, and we really appreciate their feedback. The current plan is quite different from our initial ideas, the users had a real impact. Users asked the questions below.Yeah, this sucks. Unfortunately it's still the better iToddler-inclusive option, but I really do recommend Briar and Cwtch if at all possible. Please bully the iTodders in your lives to upgrade to a real phone, specifically one that runs GrapheneOS, so Briar and Cwtch can be used instead.(I am >>110233075 poster.)
>>110233146wha bou signal??
>>110233014Already discussed at length SAARhttps://desuarchive.org/g/thread/109790490/>>110233146It's very poorly explained on their website which makes some rightfully skeptic people think the network admins can blow wide open any chat which is not the case.
>>110233792How is it not the case?>A user discovered the link to join the group that distributes CSAM and sent a complaint to our support email address or via the app to SimpleX Chat team contact.>Once we received the link to join the group, we instruct our automated bot to join it. If the complaint is confirmed as valid, the bot sends the information about the files sent in this group to the servers that store these files.
>>110233817the quote you posted doesn't say admins enter any chat they please by themselvesare you low IQ?
>>110234681Admins should not be able to see people's encrypted chats period, but on simplex they can. Very strange behavior too saging the thread twice and linking a desuarchive thread with 30 replies calling it "at length" discussion and like its weird to start another thread because of that. Looks like weird damage control for simplex.
run on your servers, simple as
for me it was battery life on phones but that's not a problem exclusive to simplex>>110233082it's also a radio term
>>110234726the bot can only see chats after it joins and does key exchange with the other clients, who then willingly would need to send it stuff. everyone in the chat would know when a bot joins and can choose to reject them.
>>110233014It is not "private" at all. You need to run Tor behind it, your IP is still leaked to the relay servers that are run by the FBI. Don't believe me, ask any LLM and it'll confirm this fact.
>>110233014It came from nowhere, claims to be better than P2P and got accepted by every influencer. It's the biggest glowop in the privacy sphere. >>110233094No, that's just what reddit says since it's uneducated.
>>110237095>You need to run Tor behind>leaked to the relay servers that are run by the FBIThis nigga implying TOR nodes aren't ran by the five eyes LOL see ya on your dutch nodes anon
