5 ms·
There's no need to implement a payment mechanism via cryptocurrency. Signal can just create a "pro" version and sell that.
by gerikson 6y ago
There's no need to implement a payment mechanism via cryptocurrency. Signal can just create a "pro" version and sell that.
- agd 6y agoAFAIK crypto is the only way to get private and secure payments. Any other payment mechanism wouldn't fit the ethos of Signal.
- gerikson 6y agoWhat I meant was that Signal can solicit payments as part of their mission. Either through donations, or by selling access to more features. There's no need to involve financing through the use of the product itself, any proceeds of which will not go to Signal anyway.
- soco 6y agoSignal doesn't sell paid features, Signal is adding a payment platform. So future apps and/or users can exchange money/crypto.
- gerikson 6y agoYes, and I would argue, with Schneier, that that's a bad idea, for all manner of reasons, not least that it will widen the legal attack surface by a lot.
- dunefox 6y agoAnd why exactly does Signal need to be a kitchen sink app? What's next, CandyCrush inside Signal?
- wasmitnetzen 6y agoThe question is more whether it needs to support private and secure payments in the first place. That is, legally and ethically, a whole different beast than private communication.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- TheCraiggers 6y agoYou seem to be confusing paying for Signal (there is no way to pay for it, but you can donate to the foundation) and exchanging money with your friends.
- gerikson 6y agoAs Schneier says, that could be implemented in a separate application, not the core Signal product. Signal just added a bunch of crowbars to the people who want to crack it open. Money laundering and tax evasion are seen seriously and there's generally more people doing it than, for example, planning terrorism.