4 ms·

Down due to a hosting outage, but back up currently. This is why I would wanna see user-hosted instances of the Signal server [0] plugging in to the network an

by avnigo 5y ago

Down due to a hosting outage, but back up currently. This is why I would wanna see user-hosted instances of the Signal server [0] plugging in to the network and supporting traffic. I think a zero-config server app install of Signal server would work great for decentralizing the messaging platform too, but unfortunately it's not set up to handle that yet. [0]: https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server

ninchuka 5y ago
moxie the creator of it is so against decentralizing signal its insane so thats never going to happen sadly, it really would fix the problem just have a few thousand server people start running and it connects to the network and gets sent messages to send to its destination
- busymom0 5y ago
  Did he give a reason for why he's against decentralization?
  - ninchuka 5y ago
    let me try and find the post about it *edit https://signal.org/blog/the-ecosystem-is-moving/ https://signal.org/blog/the-ecosystem-is-moving/ here is a post from moxie himself about why its centralised not decentralised
  - upofadown 5y ago
    https://signal.org/blog/the-ecosystem-is-moving/ https://signal.org/blog/the-ecosystem-is-moving/ ... is the article in question. Basically the argument is that federation slows down the possible rate of change. If you have but the one server in a system you can change things whenever you want and then push out any client changes. The root concept here is that constant protocol and feature change is the most desirable state. Not all of us accept that.
    - ninchuka 5y ago
      I get quicker and more reliable notifications from a self hosted matrix instance then signal and even if I went on the signal app and looked at the chat I couldn't see the message until I got a notification a bit later from them could I see it
- Jazww 5y ago
  Decentralization is not some great magic. Its a gigantic pain in the ass to fix even a single simple issue across all those servers.
  - ninchuka 5y ago
    true but it would've helped with the issue of being overloaded at least abit
pmlnr 5y ago
> user-hosted instances of the Signal Those are called XMPP or Matrix ;)

by avnigo 5y ago

ninchuka 5y ago

moxie the creator of it is so against decentralizing signal its insane so thats never going to happen sadly, it really would fix the problem just have a few thousand server people start running and it connects to the network and gets sent messages to send to its destination

busymom0 5y ago
Did he give a reason for why he's against decentralization?
- ninchuka 5y ago
  let me try and find the post about it *edit https://signal.org/blog/the-ecosystem-is-moving/ https://signal.org/blog/the-ecosystem-is-moving/ here is a post from moxie himself about why its centralised not decentralised
- upofadown 5y ago
  https://signal.org/blog/the-ecosystem-is-moving/ https://signal.org/blog/the-ecosystem-is-moving/ ... is the article in question. Basically the argument is that federation slows down the possible rate of change. If you have but the one server in a system you can change things whenever you want and then push out any client changes. The root concept here is that constant protocol and feature change is the most desirable state. Not all of us accept that.
  - ninchuka 5y ago
    I get quicker and more reliable notifications from a self hosted matrix instance then signal and even if I went on the signal app and looked at the chat I couldn't see the message until I got a notification a bit later from them could I see it
Jazww 5y ago
Decentralization is not some great magic. Its a gigantic pain in the ass to fix even a single simple issue across all those servers.
- ninchuka 5y ago
  true but it would've helped with the issue of being overloaded at least abit

pmlnr 5y ago

> user-hosted instances of the Signal Those are called XMPP or Matrix ;)