7 ms·

It's a shame that people still use Telegram when Signal is so much better, and has better credentials all around.

est 6y ago
signal the protocol is (maybe) better, but the app is inferior. People like Telegram for their usability and security is just a bonus.
- blackfawn 6y ago
  I definitely agree with this. Getting people to use Telegram instead of SMS or other random chat apps can be difficult but getting them to switch to Signal is basically a "not going to happen" until Signal ups their usability. Even people I've gotten to try out Signal all abandoned it. At least with Telegram, they stuck with it and still use it to this day. It'd honestly probably be easier to get Telegram to adopt Signal's protocol than it would be to get users to adopt [current] Signal.
  - j-james 6y ago
    Telegram's protocol itself isn't necessarily a weakness - recently, a paper was published claiming to have proved the MTProto 2.0 protocol correct. Perhaps because of how recent this was, it doesn't seem to have garnered any discussion or review anywhere. https://arxiv.org/abs/2012.03141 https://arxiv.org/abs/2012.03141
    - blackfawn 6y ago
      My above post was more of a complaint of the Signal UX rather than a critique of either protocol but thanks for the link! I would be interested to hear whether people still perceive MTProto to have weakness... but that likely won't change with how much people seem to complain about it, seemingly without much/any rationale. Either way I'll probably still be using Telegram since that's where the users are :)
jjcon 6y ago
Signal has a terrible terrible ux - most people don’t care as much as the HN-er when it comes to security - they want a chat app that just works and is feature rich
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- godelski 6y ago
  What features are Signal missing? I think there's this weird dichotomy where people are complaining about a terrible UX and others not understanding what the issues are (me for one). Only features I've wanted have rolled out in the last few months or are about to roll out (>5 group calling and usernames).
  - xenator 6y ago
    Missing features: - your friends doesn't use it - there is no public channels you like - there is no bots you use every day - your code have no integration with messenger API
- kelnos 6y ago
  I really don't get what people mean when they say this. To me, Signal is pretty indistinguishable from WhatsApp, FB Messenger, even the default SMS app. What about the UX specifically bothers you?
  - sofixa 6y ago
    > Signal is pretty indistinguishable from WhatsApp, FB Messenger, even the default SMS app. What about the UX specifically bothers you? That's part of the problem, all those you listed have poor to terrible UX and are just not great chat clients, Telegram is just better - in terms of speed ( compared to FB Messenger), features such as location sharing("where are you?", "Next to Restaurant XX " or "On the corner of A and B street" sucks, you can just share precise location via Telegram - a friend even sent me the location of a beautiful lake while on vacation because i was going in the area soon after), polls ( great for groups), message editing, search, stickers, gif integration, bots. I've used FB Messenger and Whatsapp extensively and Telegram is absolutely much better than both of them.
cwhiz 6y ago
Signal is terrible. I use the app still, but it’s horribly buggy. The disappearing messages, a hallmark feature, is fundamentally broken in some way that I can’t fully comprehend. Totally unreliable. Telegram is better in every way... except security.
- brink 6y ago
  And honestly the security is "good enough" for what I do, which is chat with friends and family on it.
- Melting_Harps 6y ago
  > Telegram is better in every way... except security. Which is why anyone bothers with these type apps in the first place, I'd like to say I'm dissapointed with the sentiment towards Signal, especially given how many here work in tech and understand how leaky these apps are designed to be and how hard development can be with a bare bones team (I experienced this first hand), but it never fails to bank on the notion that convenience will always win against security. regardless of expectation(s). Shrug... I like Signal more: and I think Telegram has many useless features that are not of any interest to me and only create needless bloat at the expense of security/privacy which is untenable, so while I hope some bugs get sorted in Signal as I run both I know why I side with Signal. I also understand that Signal runs on a thin donation based hacker budget and Moxie Marlinspike's podcast on Joe Rogan is a really cool watch that made it clear to me it's just a hacker project that scaled really well and is in need of funding and staff. I think Joe revealed himself to be a part of the money-centric Corpo class to Moxie's dismay when he refused to have that rock, paper, scissor match and you could see the disappointment in his eyes when Joe reacted almost offended at the idea that Moxie had anything worth his stake and could so quickly ascribe a dollar value to it. It reminded me that it's okay to care about the messenger (guest) that his podcast attracts rather than Joe or the brand he's created around himself, even though I agree with may of his points I struggle to think its nothing more than hook or gimmick most times. I don't really enjoy any of his standup and find a lot of his quips to be childish and immature reactions to what seem like feckless attention grabbing that can derail a guest's conversation or train of thought, much like uninvited fart jokes would amongst otherwise fascinating discussion and in depth arguments: then again he is a comedian first and foremost. With all that said, donate to help get those fixes on Signal sorted here [0]! 0: https://signal.org/donate/ https://signal.org/donate/
Analemma_ 6y ago
It's crazy to me how few people remember that, prior to its launch, Telegram was endlessly hyping up how it would be the most secure protocol ever, while trash-talking competitors and explicitly refusing to have their hand-rolled crypto examined by security professions... and then it was broken within days of launch by an admitted amateur [0]. I don't understand why this didn't immediately tank their credibility, but here we are. [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6948742 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6948742
- nucleardog 6y ago
  It's almost as if "absolute security" was not the only, or even an important, consideration for most people. This should be obvious if you look at most popular chat apps: * WhatsApp * Facebook Messenger * WeChat It's like... a who's who of the worst privacy violators.
luxuryballs 6y ago
Telegram has way better: UI, search, bots, and all kinds of other juicy quality of life stuff that Signal doesn’t have. It all comes down to what you are using it for though, there’s a sliding scale that goes from the least secure app to “don’t use computers for this at all”, just like with medication, it’s all about juggling symptoms and risk.
solarkraft 6y ago
Except it's not. Telegram has clients for every imaginable platform while AFAIK Signal only works on phones (and that's just one issue).
- chipsa 6y ago
  https://www.engadget.com/2019-11-29-signal-ipad.html https://www.engadget.com/2019-11-29-signal-ipad.html Works on tablets and desktops too. Just set it up as a linked device.
  - fsflover 6y ago
    So you must have a spyPhone tracking you. Perfect security...
  - izacus 6y ago
    Well, I tried to set it up ob my parents iPad and it demanded that they also own a smartphone with the same phonenumber. They owned feature phones so they've been blocked. Telegram paired just fine and works on any number of devices without linking them together and worrying about connectivity/battery for the main device.
    - chipsa 6y ago
      Yes. It uses the phone number as the user identifier, and the non-phone versions assume that you have a phone that you're using as the primary device, and any other devices are secondary. The primary device is mostly because tablets and desktops don't have a phone number to use as an identifier. The battery/connectivity status of that device doesn't matter a whit after the secondary devices are setup.
anigbrowl 6y ago
Signal has better encryption; I would not trust anything really confidential to Telegram. but Telegram has a vastly superior user interface and experience. It's one of the few pieces of software I can unreservedly say I love using.
kome 6y ago
You can't use signal without a cellphone... and cellphones are a privacy nightmare.
- cookieswumchorr 6y ago
  for telegram you need a phone number as well, which is bad if not for security, then for privacy reasons
  - fsflover 6y ago
    You can use a separate dumbphone for the sms verifications. It's at least much better.
    - justcool393 6y ago
      or a VoIP number
      - cookieswumchorr 6y ago
        a sim card or a reliable dedicated voip number cost money and leak your identity. it is just a bit harder to trace (one more step involved). what telegram could do to allow private use and still avoid spam would be selling phone-less accounts for crypto. And maybe mark these anonymous accounts for other users to make them suspicious of potential scammers.
  - AnonC 6y ago
    You can hide your phone numbers from other Telegram users and still chat with them (this is the default). On Signal, anyone you chat with will have your phone number.
    - ffpip 6y ago
      While you can hide your phone number, I don't think that is the default. https://telegram.org/faq#q-who-can-see-my-phone-number https://telegram.org/faq#q-who-can-see-my-phone-number
xenator 6y ago
There is person who put their 5c about Signal in every post about Telegram. Signal have terrible UI. And doesn't provide any additional value since your friends doesn't use it.
fsflover 6y ago
Decentralization is the future. Any sufficiently popular walled garden will have a problem: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25520200 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25520200. Consider Matrix instead.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
ffpip 6y ago
Saying signal is more secure, not better would be accurate.
dzsekijo 6y ago
Do you know of any unlimited free cloud storage service? I know just one, that's being Telegram.
tyrion 6y ago
It's a shame that every time that Telegram is mentioned, Signal advocates feels the need to let everybody else know how superior Signal is supposed to be compared to everything else. I don't have anything against Signal itself, but this aggressiveness and arrogance is really putting me off. Has this became some kind of religion? Do you people realize that you are not the exclusive bearer of Truth, and that maybe, just maybe people that use Telegram chose to do so for a reason and are not poor clueless persons that need to be indoctrinated? To be extra clear, my complaint is about whoever insists on spreading the falsehood that Signal is objectively better than anything else [and maybe also adds a bit of compassion on top ("it's a shame") for the rest of us unenlightened]. I would have no problem, and would actually be more inclined to switch to Signal, if you tried something a bit more modest and honest. Dunno, for example something along the lines of "If you would like an alternative to Telegram that has E2E enabled by default and on all chats, you could maybe be interested in Signal!". But what kind of discussion can we have if the argument is always "Signal is so much better, it's a shame that you people don't realize it" ?
- jlelse 6y ago
  Thanks!
- arthurcolle 6y ago
  How was my statement arrogance? Stating a fact isn't arrogance, no matter what people say. It's a fact. Saying "it's a shame that people litter when trashcans are available" shouldn't merit a response of "I really hate how these anti-littering people say it's a shame that people litter. I would rather they appeal to my sense of equanimity." Give me a break, please. Telegram has been implicated in a number of privacy scandals, and then their responses critique the authors of the indictment rather than actually criticizing the arguments themselves. Signal, even up to the recent critiques by Cellebrite, immediately responds and them discusses the merits of the claim.
g_sch 6y ago
I use Signal for 1:1 messaging and some small groups, but Telegram is much better for large groups and communities. Admin tools, UX, performance, and discoverability are all far better on Telegram. I'm quite happy to use different tools for different purposes, and I'm glad they both exist.
anoncake 6y ago
Signal is just another walled garden, no better than WhatsApp. https://github.com/LibreSignal/LibreSignal/issues/37#issuecomment-217211165 https://github.com/LibreSignal/LibreSignal/issues/37#issueco...
bigend 6y ago
Frankly Signal is so horribly buggy with basic features that I wonder had arthurcolle ever used it? I can’t create a new group, but my friends can. I don’t see friends that join Signal until I search for them manually by phone number, even though I allow Signal access to my contacts. ”So much better”?!?
- arthurcolle 6y ago
  I use it all the time. I don't do group chats much, but I use it for 1-on-1 communication. It's so much better in my opinion because 1) it satisfies my needs and 2) I trust the provider, based on the reputation that has been developed around Moxie Marlinspike and the fact that all facets of Signal are open source. Telegram is not. Furthermore, Telegram tried to pull a quick 1 billion quasi-raise with their TON bs platform, which was a joke from the very beginning. Seriously, pull up the initial whitepaper for that platform system - total cash grab. So yeah, @arthurcolle has used Signal, and likes it.

est 6y ago

signal the protocol is (maybe) better, but the app is inferior. People like Telegram for their usability and security is just a bonus.

blackfawn 6y ago
I definitely agree with this. Getting people to use Telegram instead of SMS or other random chat apps can be difficult but getting them to switch to Signal is basically a "not going to happen" until Signal ups their usability. Even people I've gotten to try out Signal all abandoned it. At least with Telegram, they stuck with it and still use it to this day. It'd honestly probably be easier to get Telegram to adopt Signal's protocol than it would be to get users to adopt [current] Signal.
- j-james 6y ago
  Telegram's protocol itself isn't necessarily a weakness - recently, a paper was published claiming to have proved the MTProto 2.0 protocol correct. Perhaps because of how recent this was, it doesn't seem to have garnered any discussion or review anywhere. https://arxiv.org/abs/2012.03141 https://arxiv.org/abs/2012.03141
  - blackfawn 6y ago
    My above post was more of a complaint of the Signal UX rather than a critique of either protocol but thanks for the link! I would be interested to hear whether people still perceive MTProto to have weakness... but that likely won't change with how much people seem to complain about it, seemingly without much/any rationale. Either way I'll probably still be using Telegram since that's where the users are :)

jjcon 6y ago

Signal has a terrible terrible ux - most people don’t care as much as the HN-er when it comes to security - they want a chat app that just works and is feature rich

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
godelski 6y ago
What features are Signal missing? I think there's this weird dichotomy where people are complaining about a terrible UX and others not understanding what the issues are (me for one). Only features I've wanted have rolled out in the last few months or are about to roll out (>5 group calling and usernames).
- xenator 6y ago
  Missing features: - your friends doesn't use it - there is no public channels you like - there is no bots you use every day - your code have no integration with messenger API
kelnos 6y ago
I really don't get what people mean when they say this. To me, Signal is pretty indistinguishable from WhatsApp, FB Messenger, even the default SMS app. What about the UX specifically bothers you?
- sofixa 6y ago
  > Signal is pretty indistinguishable from WhatsApp, FB Messenger, even the default SMS app. What about the UX specifically bothers you? That's part of the problem, all those you listed have poor to terrible UX and are just not great chat clients, Telegram is just better - in terms of speed ( compared to FB Messenger), features such as location sharing("where are you?", "Next to Restaurant XX " or "On the corner of A and B street" sucks, you can just share precise location via Telegram - a friend even sent me the location of a beautiful lake while on vacation because i was going in the area soon after), polls ( great for groups), message editing, search, stickers, gif integration, bots. I've used FB Messenger and Whatsapp extensively and Telegram is absolutely much better than both of them.

cwhiz 6y ago

Signal is terrible. I use the app still, but it’s horribly buggy. The disappearing messages, a hallmark feature, is fundamentally broken in some way that I can’t fully comprehend. Totally unreliable. Telegram is better in every way... except security.

brink 6y ago
And honestly the security is "good enough" for what I do, which is chat with friends and family on it.
Melting_Harps 6y ago
> Telegram is better in every way... except security. Which is why anyone bothers with these type apps in the first place, I'd like to say I'm dissapointed with the sentiment towards Signal, especially given how many here work in tech and understand how leaky these apps are designed to be and how hard development can be with a bare bones team (I experienced this first hand), but it never fails to bank on the notion that convenience will always win against security. regardless of expectation(s). Shrug... I like Signal more: and I think Telegram has many useless features that are not of any interest to me and only create needless bloat at the expense of security/privacy which is untenable, so while I hope some bugs get sorted in Signal as I run both I know why I side with Signal. I also understand that Signal runs on a thin donation based hacker budget and Moxie Marlinspike's podcast on Joe Rogan is a really cool watch that made it clear to me it's just a hacker project that scaled really well and is in need of funding and staff. I think Joe revealed himself to be a part of the money-centric Corpo class to Moxie's dismay when he refused to have that rock, paper, scissor match and you could see the disappointment in his eyes when Joe reacted almost offended at the idea that Moxie had anything worth his stake and could so quickly ascribe a dollar value to it. It reminded me that it's okay to care about the messenger (guest) that his podcast attracts rather than Joe or the brand he's created around himself, even though I agree with may of his points I struggle to think its nothing more than hook or gimmick most times. I don't really enjoy any of his standup and find a lot of his quips to be childish and immature reactions to what seem like feckless attention grabbing that can derail a guest's conversation or train of thought, much like uninvited fart jokes would amongst otherwise fascinating discussion and in depth arguments: then again he is a comedian first and foremost. With all that said, donate to help get those fixes on Signal sorted here [0]! 0: https://signal.org/donate/ https://signal.org/donate/

Analemma_ 6y ago

It's crazy to me how few people remember that, prior to its launch, Telegram was endlessly hyping up how it would be the most secure protocol ever, while trash-talking competitors and explicitly refusing to have their hand-rolled crypto examined by security professions... and then it was broken within days of launch by an admitted amateur [0]. I don't understand why this didn't immediately tank their credibility, but here we are. [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6948742 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6948742

nucleardog 6y ago
It's almost as if "absolute security" was not the only, or even an important, consideration for most people. This should be obvious if you look at most popular chat apps: * WhatsApp * Facebook Messenger * WeChat It's like... a who's who of the worst privacy violators.

luxuryballs 6y ago

Telegram has way better: UI, search, bots, and all kinds of other juicy quality of life stuff that Signal doesn’t have. It all comes down to what you are using it for though, there’s a sliding scale that goes from the least secure app to “don’t use computers for this at all”, just like with medication, it’s all about juggling symptoms and risk.

solarkraft 6y ago

Except it's not. Telegram has clients for every imaginable platform while AFAIK Signal only works on phones (and that's just one issue).

chipsa 6y ago
https://www.engadget.com/2019-11-29-signal-ipad.html https://www.engadget.com/2019-11-29-signal-ipad.html Works on tablets and desktops too. Just set it up as a linked device.
- fsflover 6y ago
  So you must have a spyPhone tracking you. Perfect security...
- izacus 6y ago
  Well, I tried to set it up ob my parents iPad and it demanded that they also own a smartphone with the same phonenumber. They owned feature phones so they've been blocked. Telegram paired just fine and works on any number of devices without linking them together and worrying about connectivity/battery for the main device.
  - chipsa 6y ago
    Yes. It uses the phone number as the user identifier, and the non-phone versions assume that you have a phone that you're using as the primary device, and any other devices are secondary. The primary device is mostly because tablets and desktops don't have a phone number to use as an identifier. The battery/connectivity status of that device doesn't matter a whit after the secondary devices are setup.

anigbrowl 6y ago

Signal has better encryption; I would not trust anything really confidential to Telegram. but Telegram has a vastly superior user interface and experience. It's one of the few pieces of software I can unreservedly say I love using.

kome 6y ago

You can't use signal without a cellphone... and cellphones are a privacy nightmare.

cookieswumchorr 6y ago
for telegram you need a phone number as well, which is bad if not for security, then for privacy reasons
- fsflover 6y ago
  You can use a separate dumbphone for the sms verifications. It's at least much better.
  - justcool393 6y ago
    or a VoIP number
    - cookieswumchorr 6y ago
      a sim card or a reliable dedicated voip number cost money and leak your identity. it is just a bit harder to trace (one more step involved). what telegram could do to allow private use and still avoid spam would be selling phone-less accounts for crypto. And maybe mark these anonymous accounts for other users to make them suspicious of potential scammers.
- AnonC 6y ago
  You can hide your phone numbers from other Telegram users and still chat with them (this is the default). On Signal, anyone you chat with will have your phone number.
  - ffpip 6y ago
    While you can hide your phone number, I don't think that is the default. https://telegram.org/faq#q-who-can-see-my-phone-number https://telegram.org/faq#q-who-can-see-my-phone-number

xenator 6y ago

There is person who put their 5c about Signal in every post about Telegram. Signal have terrible UI. And doesn't provide any additional value since your friends doesn't use it.

fsflover 6y ago

Decentralization is the future. Any sufficiently popular walled garden will have a problem: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25520200 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25520200. Consider Matrix instead.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

ffpip 6y ago

Saying signal is more secure, not better would be accurate.

dzsekijo 6y ago

Do you know of any unlimited free cloud storage service? I know just one, that's being Telegram.

tyrion 6y ago

It's a shame that every time that Telegram is mentioned, Signal advocates feels the need to let everybody else know how superior Signal is supposed to be compared to everything else. I don't have anything against Signal itself, but this aggressiveness and arrogance is really putting me off. Has this became some kind of religion? Do you people realize that you are not the exclusive bearer of Truth, and that maybe, just maybe people that use Telegram chose to do so for a reason and are not poor clueless persons that need to be indoctrinated? To be extra clear, my complaint is about whoever insists on spreading the falsehood that Signal is objectively better than anything else [and maybe also adds a bit of compassion on top ("it's a shame") for the rest of us unenlightened]. I would have no problem, and would actually be more inclined to switch to Signal, if you tried something a bit more modest and honest. Dunno, for example something along the lines of "If you would like an alternative to Telegram that has E2E enabled by default and on all chats, you could maybe be interested in Signal!". But what kind of discussion can we have if the argument is always "Signal is so much better, it's a shame that you people don't realize it" ?

jlelse 6y ago
Thanks!
arthurcolle 6y ago
How was my statement arrogance? Stating a fact isn't arrogance, no matter what people say. It's a fact. Saying "it's a shame that people litter when trashcans are available" shouldn't merit a response of "I really hate how these anti-littering people say it's a shame that people litter. I would rather they appeal to my sense of equanimity." Give me a break, please. Telegram has been implicated in a number of privacy scandals, and then their responses critique the authors of the indictment rather than actually criticizing the arguments themselves. Signal, even up to the recent critiques by Cellebrite, immediately responds and them discusses the merits of the claim.

g_sch 6y ago

I use Signal for 1:1 messaging and some small groups, but Telegram is much better for large groups and communities. Admin tools, UX, performance, and discoverability are all far better on Telegram. I'm quite happy to use different tools for different purposes, and I'm glad they both exist.

anoncake 6y ago

Signal is just another walled garden, no better than WhatsApp. https://github.com/LibreSignal/LibreSignal/issues/37#issuecomment-217211165 https://github.com/LibreSignal/LibreSignal/issues/37#issueco...

bigend 6y ago

Frankly Signal is so horribly buggy with basic features that I wonder had arthurcolle ever used it? I can’t create a new group, but my friends can. I don’t see friends that join Signal until I search for them manually by phone number, even though I allow Signal access to my contacts. ”So much better”?!?

arthurcolle 6y ago
I use it all the time. I don't do group chats much, but I use it for 1-on-1 communication. It's so much better in my opinion because 1) it satisfies my needs and 2) I trust the provider, based on the reputation that has been developed around Moxie Marlinspike and the fact that all facets of Signal are open source. Telegram is not. Furthermore, Telegram tried to pull a quick 1 billion quasi-raise with their TON bs platform, which was a joke from the very beginning. Seriously, pull up the initial whitepaper for that platform system - total cash grab. So yeah, @arthurcolle has used Signal, and likes it.