3 ms·

> 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

> 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.
        pvg 8y ago
        The majority of Signal users I think it's really you who is making the extraordinary claim here and you should be providing the evidence. Signal's goal, as has been repeated many times in these threads is to replace SMS and other less-secure forms of messaging for as many users as possible, not to cater to somewhat off-the-beaten-path concerns over phone numbers. They are aiming for users of messaging. And they are making the very reasonable inference that most of those users are not hung up on identifying themselves with a phone number. Additionally, if Signal's current users cared about the phone number thing that much, they wouldn't be using Signal to begin with. Where's your survey data that says Signal users just can't stand the phone-number-as-id thing?
        jake_the_third 8y ago

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.
        pvg 8y ago
        The majority of Signal users I think it's really you who is making the extraordinary claim here and you should be providing the evidence. Signal's goal, as has been repeated many times in these threads is to replace SMS and other less-secure forms of messaging for as many users as possible, not to cater to somewhat off-the-beaten-path concerns over phone numbers. They are aiming for users of messaging. And they are making the very reasonable inference that most of those users are not hung up on identifying themselves with a phone number. Additionally, if Signal's current users cared about the phone number thing that much, they wouldn't be using Signal to begin with. Where's your survey data that says Signal users just can't stand the phone-number-as-id thing?
        jake_the_third 8y ago