zlacker

[parent] [thread] 3 comments
1. gspenc+(OP)[view] [source] 2023-11-22 18:43:55
To be honest, even 50 seems really high to me. And given how many features that Signal has released recently that I don't use, didn't ask for and resent creeping their way into the UI (chat for example)... I really wish there were fewer people there to keep fixing things that aren't broken.
replies(1): >>OfSang+c1
2. OfSang+c1[view] [source] 2023-11-22 18:49:02
>>gspenc+(OP)
> (chat for example)

This must be a typo, as chat is the very thing that Signal is meant to provide. If you meant group chats, that was a widely requested feature from the user base.

It’s important to keep in mind that many of the features which Signal has been implementing, are already present in WhatsApp. The very goal of Signal is a chat app for the masses (not just us nerds), but one which actually respects privacy. The one feature that nearly everyone would agree is controversial, was the payments and associated shitcoin, but even that is a case where Signal would have feature parity with widely-used apps, and it exists in an obscure corner of the UI.

replies(2): >>barbaz+3z >>gspenc+Lx2
◧◩
3. barbaz+3z[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-11-22 21:37:36
>>OfSang+c1
maybe they mean those "chat bubbles"?
◧◩
4. gspenc+Lx2[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-11-23 14:27:08
>>OfSang+c1
> WhatsApp

I don't use WhatsApp and wasn't looking for a WhatsApp alternative. It's also fine if these were features requested by the userbase. Fair enough. But I wouldn't know. I was speaking for myself. I just wanted an SMS replacement that did e2e encryption. Nothing more.

[go to top]