5 ms·
I don't think it's so nefarious... phone numbers were just the easiest way for them to create a portable social graph without requiring users to re-discover if
by shishy 5y ago
I don't think it's so nefarious... phone numbers were just the easiest way for them to create a portable social graph without requiring users to re-discover if anything changed. Plus, it looks like this move is going to push them in a direction where phone numbers won't be required (as they've indicated previously is in the works).
- colordrops 5y agoOk, but now that it's not tied to phone numbers anymore why do you still need one to sign up? And why has this been "in the works" for years? It's certainly not that hard to implement. Many less capable and mature messengers work without a phone number.
- Vinnl 5y agoIt is still tied to phone numbers; you can now just change which one. It's hard to implement it in a privacy-preserving way. Many other messengers of similar scale implement it by storing your social graph unencrypted on their servers.
- palata 5y agoI am pretty sure it's harder than you think, while keeping Signal's UX and privacy level: https://signal.org/blog/secure-value-recovery https://signal.org/blog/secure-value-recovery
- colordrops 5y agoWhat does this have to do with being tied to a phone number?