It actually seems more like a windows 10 compatibility dilemma for developers. You can support older systems but it would require some effort. The problem is not the absence of some specific certificates, but the absence of newer ciphers altogether.
This does give security but also removes backwards compatibility with some clients that might be important for some websites.
Hard disagree on denuvo. If it's no problem for you then you must have tons of experience in re. Which puts you into some 1%-ish group. Depends on the type of mods you do of course.
You can. Google steamless.
Steam DRM is nothing like stuff people should be aware of. Ask any modder for confirmation.
Well did it help Epic when they added achievements? Guess not much. Either they never marketed this feature enough or most spending users never cared about achievements on Epic.
If you mean just the percentage of users I might agree. But those people don't really correlate with the users who provide most of the profit of the platform.
My profile is also not public but it's visible to friends. Also I can make it public when I want.
There are also achievement statistics.
I see. Still, I can see that for many people achievements with no value are no better than their absence. Platform provides value, and for now only steam provides a lot of it with almost each purchase.
Are you serious? Obviously people don't care about achievements on a platform that has almost no community-related functionality.
There is still plenty of fish for advertisers, sadly.
It's barely anonymous, and poorly encrypted. The latter is the reason Durov is in custody
There is no logic here. If it was poor it would be very easy to track anyone including criminals. You can check the news to find the reasons.
There have absolutely been cases where a backdoor/weakness/lack of encryption used to catch criminals before
I meant telegram related cases.
Some are staying safe, others are being caught precisely because of this.
I didn't see any proofs of that.
Using better encryption schemes is definitely part of that.
Part of what? I don't get the point here.
is not any different from just having TLS for transport
Yes, in simple terms, all encrypted transfer protocols are similarly protected from mitm attacks.
That just means that they store both your data in some encrypted way and the key. They can still read it trivially.
They can and they said the decryption keys are always kept separately (there are probably more layers than I can describe) from the data to make sure the servers are not used to decrypt the data locally. They can be lying for all I care. The bigger problem is that people somehow assume this a huge threat, while all previous cases didn't involve anything like that. People are getting into trouble for their public content - protected by some encryption but visible to anyone interested (who then report it to oppressive authorities).
While some go extra mile to explain to you how you should use e2e for your family group chats, real criminals do their stuff everywhere (especially on telegram) for years, staying safe. Problem is not how weak or strong the encryption is, but that once you are under oppression and do opposition activities, you're going to learn by yourself how to deal with it. Signal will not save you from people in your group chats if they are there to report on you.