Gayhitler

Car battery works.

None of them are grammatically correct because none of them are complete thoughts let alone sentences.

All three try to specify the particular monkey by enumerating that it can see your ears but do no more.

Take away the description of the monkeys ability to see your ears and what you’re left with is “the monkey”.

“The monkey” isn’t a sentence.

If you are the subject and what’s happening is that you’re wondering if the monkey can see your ears then the sentence you want is “I’m wondering if the monkey can see my ears.”

If, as I suspect, you’re using “the monkey whose ability to see my ears I’m wondering about” as the subject of some larger more complex and cool sentence then you gotta lay out that part before someone can give solid grammatical advice.

It’s 孟子 for anyone wondering

No.

E: okay, it’s not fair to just tell you the answer when you’re already broadcasting a desire to read a bunch of stuff so here goes:

If you want to see analysis and consideration of the right from an outside perspective you ought to be on hexbear or grad. Both instances don’t have near as many sky is falling posts or comments and trend towards figuring out why something is happening within the framework of doctrinaire Marxism Leninism or imperialism or at least what should be done to mitigate the effects rather than having a big ol hissy fit over it.

If, as is implied by your post and comments (“ good spirited debate”, “ opposing and novel”, celebrated and debated“, “ worthy of discussion or debate”), you just wanna see people fight each other online then check out reddit, x (the everything app) and facebook where that happens often.

If you have, and this is a reach, the desire to understand people who you think are on that right wing spectrum around you in real life, go talk to them. People love telling you what they think and when they don’t it’s because they know something you don’t or they’re up to something.

There’s a lot of answers itt but heres a simpler one:

If you want to prevent people in power from having access to communications there are two methods employed, broadly speaking:

The first is to make a very secure, zero knowledge, zero trust, zero log system so that when the authorities come calling you can show them your empty hands and smirk.

Signal doesn’t actually do this, but they’re closer to this model than the second one I’m about to describe. Bear in mind they’re a us company so when the us authorities come to their door or authorities from some nation the us has a treaty with come to their door signal is legally required to comply and provide all the information they have.

The second is to simply not talk to the authorities. Telegram was closer to this model than signal, using a bunch of different servers in nations with wildly different extradition and information sharing mechanisms in order to make forcing them to comply with some order Byzantine to the point of not being worth it.

Eventually the powers that be got their shit together and put hands on telegrams owner so now they’re complying with all lawful orders and a comparison of the tech is how you’d pick one.

The technology behind the two doesn’t matter really but default telegram is less “secure” than default imessage (I was talking with someone about it so it’s on the old noggin’).

It’s just as well, rcs in America only has guarantees of features if you’re on the same servers as the other people, so there’s a big split between the Samsung and google rcses with all kinds of weird mixed media stuff if you’re both on gchat or the Samsung fork and nothing but maybe higher resolution pictures if you’re not.

It’s part of why I’m so willing to recommend imessage because for better or worse in America it’s the defacto standard.

Yeah and even if you’re on an ios with rcs plenty of old android devices just scale the videos down to postage stamp size anyway by default so you get bad looking pictures no matter what.

Yeah per text charges are really uncommon in the anglosphere, although the pay as you go carriers and plans have data limits.

If you’re on contract or renewing contract with an American carrier they’ll usually take literally any phone you have in trade for their lowest cost ios or android device, your choice. I took them up on it several years ago because the gimmie device was the only physically small iphone at the time. Sometimes it adds a couple of bucks to your monthly bill if you pick one with a little more storage or whatever but that amounts to them selling you the phone for fifty bucks or so over two years.

Hell, usually if you’re signing up for a new account they’ll offer some android and ios phones for free to get you on contract.

Half of each person is getting them to use encrypted chat with you one on one and half is getting the group chats to use it. If you can knock out half the battle most of the time then you should do it.

In my experience ios and android users are equally open/resistant to using some new thing.

I recognize that for a particular type of threat model or ideology all proprietary software amounts to the same level of vulnerability. The op only asked about encrypted chat. The implication that I picked up on and responded to was that the op is in America or concerned about American cell network compromises and wanted to address that.

That’s a real simple threat to get past, just go to whatever is encrypted that the most people use.

Most people use imessage, so that’s what I suggested.

It seems like I’m not being clear. The goal is to get 100% on to encrypted chat.

Right now in America, about sixty percent of the phones are running ios. ios has imessage by default. The application which those people use to do imessage is called messages (very unconfusing!) and also does texts. When you’re using imessage in messages the text bubbles are blue, rcs and sms are green. Imessage is an encrypted chat.

If a person running android wants to use imessage they need to bridge it to their phone from a mac (messages and imessage are available on mac) using the bluebubbles application.

So three out of five of the people you know are already using encrypted chat. If you, the op, can get on their level then you only have to convince the other two to use some other chat thing that they can do. Maybe signal or something.

So the cost of running a mac computer as a bridge so you can use imessage through the bluebubbles android app is for you, the op, to get on the encrypted chat application those three out of five people are already on. You’d still need to use xmpp or something for everyone else but now you only need to worry about two out of five people.

I’m pretty poor and a hundred bucks isn’t a terrible price to pay for being sixty percent there. If I could have done that with pgp back in the day (when a hundred bucks was worth something!) I would have jumped at the chance.

Just avoiding having to explain to people that email was transmitted in plaintext and what that meant and not either have to talk them down from taking a pickaxe to their computer or convince them that it doesn’t matter that they have nothing to hide would have been worth it back then.

It’s also a completely hypothetical cost that assumes you don’t just stumble into an old mac and won’t trade your phone in for one running ios to save that cash.

As I said, use signal for everything else.

If immediately getting sixty percent of your chats encrypted isn’t worth a hundred bucks to you I don’t know what to say. We’re looking at this from fundamentally different perspectives. I’m trying to meet a goal to solve a problem and you’re trying to find the fair solution.

It’s good to try to find the fair solution.

If you’re in america almost sixty percent of phones are ios.

If you’re choosing an encrypted chat and sixty percent of people are already using it then that’s the one you choose. The hardest thing is compliance and you’re almost two thirds of the way there if you just pay a hundred bucks (or scrounge up an old mac) and run the bridge app. Then you use signal for everything else.

I think we’re looking at this from fundamentally different perspectives. I’m not worried about a universal solution because I know I’m not getting to 100% compliance with any solution so I suggested the one that immediately fixes the majority of the problem. Having had to convince people to exchange pgp keys twenty five years ago, I’d pay a hundred bucks to not have to deal with that for two thirds of the people I know.

Think about it this way: if you were starting from scratch would you rather have to convince all your contacts to move their chats with you to signal or matrix or whatever or would you rather have to convince four out of ten to do that?

Obviously you’d pick the easier thing because no matter how committed you may be to not using proprietary software or big corporate apps or fragmented ecosystems you actually have to accomplish the goal of chatting with people using encryption and all the process compliance and wheedling and convincing and tech support for family members is time you could be spending talking about gardening, sharing baby pictures, plotting to overthrow the government or whatever you would normally be doing.

The barrier to entry was intended to refer to others since it’s already installed on over half their phones to start with and most people are gonna be using a messaging program on their phone.

When there’s above a 50% chance the person you’re talking to is already using a particular encrypted messaging program that’s the lowest barrier to entry.

The barrier to entry always refers to other people because the hardest part of establishing private communications has always been convincing other people to actually do it.

If you really wanted to get on imessage for the least amount of cash out of pocket possible, the bluebubble bridge application random letters person mentioned is ~$100 for an old mac, and tbh that’s a high estimate in my experience. People are just giving those things away nowadays.