Looks like development is finally speeding up! Will it reach feature parity with other IMs, so users won't have to choose either privacy or usability?

Personally, I want to be able to use Signal from multiple mobile phones and desktops, with my identity unlinked from legacy phone numbers (it's ok to do phone number verification as anti-abuse / anti-spam, for lack of a better alternative).

@nerdbeard No, how is it?

I'm skimming through the reviews, and one is saying that it lacks the polish of Signal. That's worrying, 'cause I happen to think that Signal still needs a lot of polish before I can recommend it to non-technical friends who are unable to manually backup and restore messages when switching devices.

@codewiz I wouldn't use it casually, but if I had a valid use case that requires security and no exchange of personal information, it fills the critical requirements.

@codewiz Plus, the Session identifiers are so sexy. Why be [email protected] when I can be 0508356a19c69ee0dee9584ec3dc22ce8fade34b50c6fac646531f867c274e9604! Down, ladies, I've got coding to do.

@nerdbeard I tried installing Session and I'm taking it for a spin.

My first complaint is: a single session ID quickly becomes linked to your true identity (or to other pseudonymous identities, like in the present case). Bitcoin wallets easily and transparently enable you to use different addresses for each contact.

@codewiz Session IDs are created as needed and you can have as many open and connected at once as you need.

@codewiz IMO that (the need of a cell number) and the centralization is what's wrong about Signal.

WhatsApp founder said the same about number verification for reducing spam. It sounds like a lousy argument to me. Why not something as simple as whitelists? It doesn't have to be like an open inbox. Even though open inboxes haven't made email unusable. Idk, that reasoning seems utterly wrong to me, and given that it's said by intelligent people I just think it's an excuse.

@tagomago An invite system might work well enough to limit abuse, but might also limit growth.

Keep in mind that anything that requires a lot of human verification is economically unfeasible for free software as well as free-to-use services like WhatsApp. They *must* make it work with minimal manual intervention or they can't ever hope to scale to hundreds of millions of users.

@codewiz I bet there are workarounds that ease that, like having a secondary inbox for unknown users where you accept or not new accounts. Doesn't Facebook require accepting friend requests? Has that stopped its growth?

It's not like if I would come up with a perfect system in 5 minutes, but there (at Signal, or WhatsApp) are lots and lots of people being paid to think about that. In fact you get messages from unknown users that way too. Also, see telemarketing... :blobsweats:

@codewiz I really hope so. I'm tired of helping my friends without smartphones hack the chromium version

@codewiz As long as Signal is not federated/decentralized, it is not an option.

@cowanon @kirschwipfel iirc, moxie came out a couple of years ago with a talk on why he doesn't believe that federated IMs have a chance against the non-federated competition.

I wonder if he'd still holds those beliefs today, after seeing how the fediverse is evolving and gaining traction.

He is still telling this tale, e.g. at 36C3, ignoring or concealing important impirteng facts. E.g that a few centralized systems are easier to censor than many decentralized.

@codewiz See :
> is down and hundreds, if not thousands of campaign websites and leftist blogs are unavailable at the moment.
> This happens when we "agree" on certain providers instead of diversifying our infrastructure. Outages and DDoS attacks can have a significant impact. Let this be a warning.

@codewiz Looks like your pressure worked, Signal's going to decouple from cell numbers.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!