zlacker

> Shilling sketchy cryptocurrencies is indicative of loose morals, which makes me think I was wrong to trust them in the past.

Who decided it was sketchy?

The "I don't like change so I'm going to piss all over you" attitude is what sinks a lot good things.

How does Signal benefit from being a shill for this coin? Are they being paid by MOB or do they get a % of the cut?

So far all I've read are people screaming their heads off that MOB eats babies and how dare Signal stoop so low as to even fart in their general direction, but I have yet to see anyone explain why MOB is bad or how Signal is bad for giving MOB a platform.

>>cptski+(OP)
Yea, I'm bearish on cryptocurrencies, but I think moxie and his team have built up an incredible amount of goodwill in my book. Enough for me to hear out their solution before making a decision. I'm assuming they didn't write dogecoin2 or even a bitcoin clone. It will be interesting to learn about it.

>>cptski+(OP)
> How does Signal benefit from being a shill for this coin? Are they being paid by MOB or do they get a % of the cut?

The CEO of signal messenger LLC was/is the CTO of MOB.

See https://www.reddit.com/r/signal/comments/mm6nad/bought_mobil... and https://www.wired.com/story/signal-mobilecoin-payments-messa...

>>cptski+(OP)
Part of the problem is that at the moment any government trying to force Signal to break the e2e security model is clearly interfering with speech.

By incorporating cryptocurrency/payments, governments are being handed a massive lever to force Signal to comply with the financial monitoring requirements that governments have in place.

This has a negative impact on those of us who just wanted a secure communications platform.

>>iudqno+i2
> The CEO of signal messenger LLC was/is the CTO of MOB.

But in Edit 4 of the Reddit post it says

> Also, the extended whitepaper wrongly cites Moxie as chief technology officer, while he is the technical advisor.

On top of that, this whitepaper that's being passed around is a forgery with 1.5 pages of factually incorrect information.

The Wired article you link isn't even really critical, it just matter-of-factly explains the feature and it's back story.

> Signal's choice of MobileCoin is no surprise for anyone watching the cryptocurrency's development since it launched in late 2017. Marlinspike has served as a paid technical adviser for the project since its inception, and he's worked with Goldbard to design MobileCoin's mechanics with a possible future integration into apps like Signal in mind. (Marlinspike notes, however, that neither he nor Signal own any MobileCoins.)

It seems like you're trying conclusions based on lies you read 2nd or 3rd hand and didn't bother to verify. The reddit post you linked to would be received very differently depending on when you read it since it's been edited numerous times with addendums refuting earlier claims. Only by reading from beginning to end with all edits can you start to see a clear picture. Even then the picture I see is someone backpedaling a lot of false claims they made.

>>parano+Mn
Thank you, this is honestly the only clear and valid argument I've seen from anyone around the feature.

Everyone else is trying to pass off false information, doctored white papers, and all sort of conspiracy theories to support their dislike for the feature.