Also, the UK doesn't control its border. The Irish border is open. Some EU rules still apply to Northern Ireland.
The UK is getting more immigrants now than when it was part of the EU. How is that supposed to preserve "Britishness", whatever that is?
Personally, I see it as existential. Any country that ceases control over its borders, immigration, and culture ceases to be a country and becomes a place that some people sometimes live. Britishness could not exist without Brits, it would have been relegated to the history books, just like Austrian Empire or Ottoman Empire, if not for Brexit.
So Scotland should get out of the UK?
Scotland is losing much more self-determination to the UK, than the UK was to the EU.
Oh I get it and I agree with you fully. Angel'o'ophere is the smartest person on earth.
Each pair of persons shall have its own messaging app.
This way on my phone I would have:
-wife messaging
-dad messaging
-mom messaging
-kid1 messaging
-kid2 messaging
-coworker1 messaging
-coworker2 messaging
-friend1 messaging
-friend 200 messaging
for a total of 3 hundred different, incompatible messaging application each with their own notification system and server.
Am I getting this right? Thank god you are there to enlighten us!
Why do not all messaging services automatically sent everything as email anyway? Would make sense or not?
While having some similar purposes, instant messaging and emails are still different enough for both of them to exist as they serve different purposes. Phone calls as well.
Whatsapp and Facebook Messenger are both instant messaging providers, and there is no valid reason why they couldn't be interoperable.
I would merge a couple of them, and use a single messaging application that work on my phone and computer.
ARE YOU DAFT?
No! That is exactly what no one except rare cases like you want.
I think you underestimate the number of people who would like the ability to merge at least some of them. And again, it wouldn't FORCE you to do it if you don't want to.
I want them separated on app level.
What is next? All Excel sheets need to be opened in Word? All Word documents in PowerPoint?
Is it really so damn difficult to grasp that normal people want message apps separated?
Except that Excel and Word are not replacements. Most people see Signal, Whatsapp and Facebook Messenger as replacements, and "normal" people don't want them to be separated and would rather use 1-2 apps instead of 5-6. But who care if they don't? Maybe only 10% want interoperability. That's still enough to do it, no mater if you personally like it or not.
But I want a message sent by skype to end up in my skype and not in an universal messaging app. What the fuck, are you a moron?`
You are the idiot who fail to understand a basic conversation. So I get it now, you are just too stupid to understand why interoperability would be a good thing.
If every message I receive ends up in the same messaging app, because I would be to lazy to somehow configure the universal app to reject the messages and route them elsewhere: then I HAVE TO CHECK EVERY DAMN MASSAGE INDIVIDUALLY IN A TIMLEY MANNER TO NOT LOSE AN EMERHENCY EVENT.
If it's so important to you to have them separated, you'll take the time to configure them that way, won't you?
And this is assuming the merging is done by default/automatic, which likely wouldn't be the case. But let say I prefer it that way, why couldn't I configure my whatsapp messages to be forwarded automatically to my favorite messaging app so that I don't have to install and monitor my whatsapp messages separately?
Also most good applications can be setup for distinctive rings for different contacts. Some of them can be your emergency contacts if you want.
It does not make any damn sense to force Apple to route every daman message app into iMessage.
No, what we want is to force Apple and others to be interoperable, so that I never, ever have to use iMessage and 99% of the other messaging apps that I don't care about.
That makes iMessage completely useless
Please stop giving arguments in favor of interoperability, this is supposed to be my role
If iMessage is your preferred application, then you should be able to create 5 different iMessage accounts, one would be urgent, and the other less.
And you could get a different notification (or no notification at all!) depending on which account you've been contacted on.
Your point is moot. You just don't get it (yet).
I agree. Brexit could be a good thing despite being bad for the UK's economy.
However, Brexit was sold, at least in part, as a way to improve the economy of the UK. Clearly it didn't happen. First step is to admit that. It was one of the main argument for Brexit.
And this is despite the fact that the UK, like most of the richer countries inside the EU, was a net contributor to the EU budget. Just like rich regions of the UK tend to subsidize poorer regions.
The other main argument was immigration. Since Brexit, net immigration levels to the UK reached an all-time high. Despite promises by the conservatives to reduce the numbers. The immigration profile changed (likely less from eastern EU, more from outside the EU), but again I don't see how this was a good thing for the UK.
Just because the UK is doing better than Germany doesn't mean it wouldn't have done even better if it stayed in the EU.
Most likely, the UK staying in the EU would have benefited both the EU (including Germany) and the UK.
That is exactly what I have, an account for each app. Why would I want to mege them into one?
As I said, even if the messaing protocols were interopable, you wouldn't be forced to do it.
I would merge a couple of them, and use a single messaging application that work on my phone and computer.
Your email example makes no sense. Or how exactly do you sent an email to my signal or telegram or imessage account?
It makes perfect sense.
You can send an email from Gmail to Hotmail. By your logic, they should be made not interoperable so that you need to install both applications on your phone.
What is great of email is that it is not controlled by a single entity and can be used to join anyone. That's not true for Telegram or iMessage.
While correct about open source, nothing about iMessage encryption is 'roll your own'.
When a user turns on iMessage on a device, the device generates encryption and signing pairs of keys for use with the service. For encryption, there is an encryption RSA 1280-bit key as well as an encryption EC 256-bit key on the NIST P-256 curve. For signatures, Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA) 256-bit signing keys are used. The private keys are saved in the device’s keychain and only available after first unlock. The public keys are sent to Apple Identity Service (IDS), where they are associated with the user’s phone number or email address, along with the device’s APNs address.
You'll have to trust Apple on this, and that they didn't screw anything in the process.
If you don't trust this, do you shop online or bank online?
You can bank and shop online using an open source web browser where the encryption can be audited. That's not possible for iMessage.
But sure, you can't control what the bank/merchant does with your credit card number once they have it. Which is why you have to check for unauthorized transactions from time to time, or accept the risks.
Who in his right mind wants interoperability between message platforms? That would be utterly stupid.
Ideally everybody could pick his favorite messaging app and be able to communicate with everyone yes.
Just like email. It would suck if gmail could only communicate with gmail, don't you think?
I want messages sent by a WhatsApp user end up in WhatsApp, and not in IMessage. Same for Signal, Telegram etc.
If I see a red 3 at my Signal app, I know it is important.
If I see a red 10 at WhatsApp, I know I can ignore it for a day or two.
If both would go to iMessage, I had a red 13 there and every time I get a new message: I have to check it!
Not sure what your red 3 and 10 means. But, obviously, you would be free to register for 3 different accounts if you prefer, and use three different application if that's how you like it to be organized. So your point is moot.
It's still a little sad that imessage is not included. Interoperability could have boosted its popularity a bit.
How is it sad? Why do we even need iMessage to begin with, given the dozens of alternatives which are cross-platform?
I'm not demanding anything here. I wouldn't use Safari even if they released it on other platforms.
Let just not pretend (like DarkOx did) that Apple is blocking Chrome and Firefox on iOS because they are an anti-monopoly champion and want to avoid Google Chrome to become a monopoly.
It's in the same place as NCSA Mosaic. Why should Apple support all of these platforms?
If they care about Google's monopoly in the browser market, and want to avoid it, the logical thing would be for them to release Safari for Windows and Android.
I mean, if Safari is so good as a browser, surely people on those platforms will want it, isn't it?
Two wrongs doesn't make it right.
Just because you don't like Google's near monopoly in the browser market doesn't mean you should be a cheerleader for Apple's anti-competitive behavior.
Apple not allowing competition in the browser engine sucks. If their browser is so good, not to mention installed by default, iOS users will keep using it despite the fact that Firefox and Chrome are available as well.
Also, changing from one browser to the next is quite easy. People are not as much locked into Google Chrome as they can be to say, Apple's iOS or Microsoft Windows.
You can often even import settings from your old browser when installing the new one.
Mozilla and Google already build and maintain two separate browser implementations. Ones with Webkit for Apple, and ones with Blink or Gecko for everyone else.
They maintain an iOS application, as well as applications for other operating systems.
Apple's plan would force Mozilla and Google to either release and maintain TWO different iOS applications unless they bend the knee and use Webkit in the EU despite having the option not to.
I agree with Google and Mozilla. Apple is the evil here.
Anyone can make an omelet with eggs. The trick is to make one with none.
