457
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by esaru@beehaw.org to c/technology@beehaw.org

While Jitsi is open-source, most people use the platform they provide, meet.jit.si, for immediate conference calls. They have now introduced a "Know Your Customer" policy and require at least one of the attendees to log in with a Facebook, Github (Microsoft), or Google account.

One option to avoid this is to self-host, but then you'll be identifiable via your domain and have to maintain a server.

As a true alternative to Jitsi, there's jami.net. It is a decentralized conference app, free open-source, and account creation is optional. It's available for all major platforms (Mac, Windows, Linux, iOS, Android), including on F-Droid.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Cube6392@beehaw.org 117 points 1 year ago

Those are all SaaS providers with meeting software available. If someone was using Jitsi, it was specifically to not use a login with any of those providers. They're actively deciding not to continue operation with this. Its like when OnlyFans declares they wouldn't allow adult content going forward

[-] adamnejm@programming.dev 19 points 1 year ago

Its like when OnlyFans declares they wouldn't allow adult content

So... Tumblr?

[-] ram@lemmy.ca 26 points 1 year ago
[-] snooggums@kbin.social 21 points 1 year ago

I laughed pretty hard at OnlyFans trying to remove the only thing that I was aware they hosted.

[-] Cube6392@beehaw.org 13 points 1 year ago

Yeah but at least Tumblr had a majority of non porn content. Jitsi is almost entirely privacy wonks, and only fans is almost entirely porn

[-] bedrooms@kbin.social 10 points 1 year ago

I imagine that, at least, the videos wouldn't go through those SAAS providers, and that's relatively a plus still.

[-] gelberhut@lemdro.id 5 points 1 year ago

Never used Jitsi. Above you indirectly say that from the functional point of view Jitsi is noticeably worse than meeting solutions of MS/Google/FB. Is this really so?

[-] Cube6392@beehaw.org 9 points 1 year ago

I don't know how I indirectly said that. I certainly didn't mean to. Its less well known, perfectly fine, and it's killer feature for a long time has been being decoupled from privacy disrespecting big tech companies

[-] gelberhut@lemdro.id 3 points 1 year ago

"If someone was using Jitsi, it was specifically to not use a login with any of those providers" this sounds like the only reason to use jitsi is avoid big guys, and if you cannot avoid them jitsi makes no sense - i.e. "no big guys" is the only feature worth it.

Btw, "login via Google" and use "Google meet" are significantly different cases from privacy point of view.

[-] Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 1 year ago

It's not the only reason to use jitsi, just that most people wouldn't bother seeking any alternative if they didn't care.

[-] Cube6392@beehaw.org 6 points 1 year ago

"Main motivating factor" != "Only viable reason"

Sorry for any unclarity I introduced. And yes, login via google vs full on google meet are two different things, but if I have to login via google for Jitsi I'm suddenly far more likely to use Jami

[-] anlumo@feddit.de 4 points 1 year ago

My experience has been that Jitsi is much better when the connection is bad. However, its default setting is that video is cropped to be square, which is very bad. I don’t even think that the user can change that.

[-] masterspace@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago

Those are all SaaS providers with meeting software available.

With paid for commercial meeting software available.

If someone was using Jitsi, it was specifically to not use a login with any of those providers.

Or because they didn't want to pay ongoing SAAS fees.

They're actively deciding not to continue operation with this. Its like when OnlyFans declares they wouldn't allow adult content going forward

It's literally nothing like that since Onlyfans is not an open source project that lets you host your own instance and run it however you like.

If you want anonymity run it yourself. If you want to use their servers it's reasonable that they expect to know a modicum about how to verify you are who you say you are. There is literally no other way to prevent abuse other than identity verification of bad actors.

this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2023
457 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37554 readers
410 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS