5 ms·

I'll re-rephrase. Is it a problem of: (1) allocating developer time and organizational priorities; or, (2) a technical incompatibility with Signal's existing,

I'll re-rephrase. Is it a problem of: (1) allocating developer time and organizational priorities; or, (2) a technical incompatibility with Signal's existing, phone number-based model? Based on your response I'm inferring (1), but I'm frustrated that this is never directly answered when the topic comes up.

tptacek 8y ago
It's more (1) than (2), is what I think, although I think non-phone authentication is probably trickier than we think it is and so the two categories bleed a bit. I seriously don't understand what people expect in these discussions, though. The situation is straightforward. A small but vocal minority of Signal's user base wants non-phone-number identification. Signal hasn't prioritized that feature. Put up, or use a different messenger. How is this complicated? Don't pick horrible messengers, like ones where encryption isn't enabled by default, or doesn't even exist for group messages, or isn't built on a protocol anyone understands or has reviewed. But even with that constraint, you have options.
- jake_the_third 8y ago
  > A small but vocal minority of Signal's user base wants non-phone-number identification. Have you done a survey before arriving to this conclusion. If so, I'd love to take a look at it, if possible. Otherwise, I can't see how you can make this assertion; everything can be dismissed as a "small but vocal minority". As a previous signal user, I stopped using signal because I discovered this issue.
  - tptacek 8y ago
    As a previous user of a program that uses phone numbers as identification you stopped using Signal because you discovered that it uses phone numbers as identification?
    - cyphar 8y ago
      Here's my data point: I used to use Signal but then stopped using a smart-phone for a year, and I very quickly discovered that unlike other chat systems (like Matrix) Signal is so tied to you having a smart-phone that you can't use any desktop communication method. The Chrome App pairs with your phone rather than registering a new device. (Also, it's kinda funny that Signal has reimplemented the iMessage problem -- you have to unregister your phone number on your website so people can SMS you again rather than continuously sending you Signal messages unintentionally.) (There are also other problems that have bubbled up in Signal in the past year since I stopped using it -- I've heard there's an auto-backup process that takes more than an hour and makes your phone unusable and you cannot change when it happens.)
    - jake_the_third 8y ago
      Yes. More precisely, I stopped when I discovered that I couldn't decouple the signal user from my phone number. More importantly, I'm still very interested in seeing the data behind your vocal-minority assertion.
      - pvg 8y ago
        The survey data you are looking for is WhatsApp.
        jake_the_third 8y ago
        I don't see how. Could you explain?
        pvg 8y ago
        The biggest messaging platform on the planet uses phone numbers as user ids. It seems very unlikely a majority of users see this as a showstopper.
        jake_the_third 8y ago
        Those users do not use it a secure messaging platform. The see it as a way to get around SMS fees. The majority of Signal users are likely privacy- and security-focused, and chose to use signal because of the features it provides on those fronts. Comparing those two userbases doesn't make much sense to me.
- spockz 8y ago
  I think mintplant intentions are simply to figure out why Signal is sticking to using phone numbers as ID. I can imagine wanting a tool you like and trust to get broader adoption.

tptacek 8y ago

It's more (1) than (2), is what I think, although I think non-phone authentication is probably trickier than we think it is and so the two categories bleed a bit. I seriously don't understand what people expect in these discussions, though. The situation is straightforward. A small but vocal minority of Signal's user base wants non-phone-number identification. Signal hasn't prioritized that feature. Put up, or use a different messenger. How is this complicated? Don't pick horrible messengers, like ones where encryption isn't enabled by default, or doesn't even exist for group messages, or isn't built on a protocol anyone understands or has reviewed. But even with that constraint, you have options.

jake_the_third 8y ago
> A small but vocal minority of Signal's user base wants non-phone-number identification. Have you done a survey before arriving to this conclusion. If so, I'd love to take a look at it, if possible. Otherwise, I can't see how you can make this assertion; everything can be dismissed as a "small but vocal minority". As a previous signal user, I stopped using signal because I discovered this issue.
- tptacek 8y ago
  As a previous user of a program that uses phone numbers as identification you stopped using Signal because you discovered that it uses phone numbers as identification?
  - cyphar 8y ago
    Here's my data point: I used to use Signal but then stopped using a smart-phone for a year, and I very quickly discovered that unlike other chat systems (like Matrix) Signal is so tied to you having a smart-phone that you can't use any desktop communication method. The Chrome App pairs with your phone rather than registering a new device. (Also, it's kinda funny that Signal has reimplemented the iMessage problem -- you have to unregister your phone number on your website so people can SMS you again rather than continuously sending you Signal messages unintentionally.) (There are also other problems that have bubbled up in Signal in the past year since I stopped using it -- I've heard there's an auto-backup process that takes more than an hour and makes your phone unusable and you cannot change when it happens.)
  - jake_the_third 8y ago
    Yes. More precisely, I stopped when I discovered that I couldn't decouple the signal user from my phone number. More importantly, I'm still very interested in seeing the data behind your vocal-minority assertion.
    - pvg 8y ago
      The survey data you are looking for is WhatsApp.
      - jake_the_third 8y ago
        I don't see how. Could you explain?
        pvg 8y ago
        The biggest messaging platform on the planet uses phone numbers as user ids. It seems very unlikely a majority of users see this as a showstopper.
        jake_the_third 8y ago
        Those users do not use it a secure messaging platform. The see it as a way to get around SMS fees. The majority of Signal users are likely privacy- and security-focused, and chose to use signal because of the features it provides on those fronts. Comparing those two userbases doesn't make much sense to me.
spockz 8y ago
I think mintplant intentions are simply to figure out why Signal is sticking to using phone numbers as ID. I can imagine wanting a tool you like and trust to get broader adoption.