zlacker

[return to "Privacy is priceless, but Signal is expensive"]
1. Canada+kb[view] [source] 2023-11-16 17:05:48
>>mikece+(OP)
Seriously consider setting up a recurring donation if you prefer Signal. They have delivered consistently over the years. I set the $20/month back when they introduced the option.

I'm curious what the breakdown of donations is. I only have 1 contact with a $10/month and 1 with a $5/month badge. Of course there could be others not displaying the badge. Signal really needs 500,000 people giving $20/month and plus the rich guys giving some millions on top of that to be in a safe financial position.

Maybe something that could be done to encourage donations is have the client estimate how much raw infra costs your usage created and display in the donation screen.

◧◩
2. rglull+Vu[view] [source] 2023-11-16 18:22:18
>>Canada+kb
I fail to understand the point of supporting an organization that is completely against self-sovereignty like Signal is. Why would I want to pay someone to develop something that traps me into their platform and does not offer a way out?
◧◩◪
3. daniel+fO[view] [source] 2023-11-16 19:53:36
>>rglull+Vu
Given how many activists have used it in overthrowing dictatorial governments, self-sovereignty seems an odd choice of words to claim it doesn’t support.
◧◩◪◨
4. rglull+x21[view] [source] 2023-11-16 20:59:31
>>daniel+fO
Perhaps it was a bad choice of words. What I mean is that they say "you don't need to trust us", yet they require you to run through them. They refuse to build their system in a decentralized way, and the more that time goes by the more the decentralized alternatives are showing they are as secure as Signal without forcing us to accept their restrictions like mandatory use of phone numbers for authentication.
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. Barrin+k71[view] [source] 2023-11-16 21:22:50
>>rglull+x21
> "you don't need to trust us"

you literally don't. It's a fully encrypted service. The literal purpose of encryption is to move data securely through insecure or even adversarial channels. Which you can verify, it's audited and open source.

They refuse to build the app in a decentralized way because decentralization is an ideological obsession that is useless in this context, and because centralized organizations can actually ship polished software that works for normal people and move quickly.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. lrvick+ue1[view] [source] 2023-11-16 21:59:27
>>Barrin+k71
Centralized supply chain, and metadata protection is anchored on SGX.

They can use their pick of SGX exploits to undermine the weak metadata protections and they (or apple/google) could, if pressured, ship tweaked versions of their centrally compiled apps to select targets that use "42" as the random number generator. No one would be the wiser.

Signal is a money pit with a pile of single points of failure for no reason.

Matrix is already proving federated end to end encryption can scale, particularly when users are free to pay for hosting their own servers as they like, which can also generate income.

[go to top]