4 ms·

I'm really torn on Signal these days. It's still a great method of communication, but it's kinda floating in a sea of other great methods of communication. I r

by h4waii 4y ago

I'm really torn on Signal these days. It's still a great method of communication, but it's kinda floating in a sea of other great methods of communication. I remember using TextSecure while rockin' a Whisper System shirt, cause it was the best way to show support, but now it's opaque updates to include cryptocurrency, chat stickers, and subscriptions.

dendrite9 4y ago
I liked Threema but it had the same issue of getting other people to use it. For me it was usually very specific individuals I wanted to share a channel with so it wasn't too difficult. But for more general contacts and friends there was no chance. And maybe that is ok in the end.
- cuu508 4y ago
  I've set Signal as my SMS app. When I message somebody, sometimes they happen to have Signal installed, and so it's a Signal message. Otherwise, it is a plain SMS.
  - dmix 4y ago
    You can't do that on iPhone sadly.
public_defender 4y ago
> other great methods of communication. Really though? From my perspective, it seems as though an option can either be a great academic solution or it can be widely adopted. I've used Signal service discovery to decloak a whole mess of colleagues. I'm talking about people who have firstname@aol.com email addresses. Good luck finding another messenger with penetration that deep and a material dedication to user privacy or security. Alternatives exist, like Telegram I guess, but I perceive the list of viable alternatives to be very short. That's not to say we should accept Signal because it's inevitable, just that network size should be a strong consideration when considering how to advocate for changes or decide between potential alternatives. Example: Signal requires a phone number as an identifier. Do we spend resources lobbying Signal to accelerate deprecation of phone numbers or advocating that people use other software? In my view, the size of the user base makes lobbying Signal worth the effort.

by h4waii 4y ago

dendrite9 4y ago

I liked Threema but it had the same issue of getting other people to use it. For me it was usually very specific individuals I wanted to share a channel with so it wasn't too difficult. But for more general contacts and friends there was no chance. And maybe that is ok in the end.

cuu508 4y ago
I've set Signal as my SMS app. When I message somebody, sometimes they happen to have Signal installed, and so it's a Signal message. Otherwise, it is a plain SMS.
- dmix 4y ago
  You can't do that on iPhone sadly.

public_defender 4y ago

> other great methods of communication. Really though? From my perspective, it seems as though an option can either be a great academic solution or it can be widely adopted. I've used Signal service discovery to decloak a whole mess of colleagues. I'm talking about people who have firstname@aol.com email addresses. Good luck finding another messenger with penetration that deep and a material dedication to user privacy or security. Alternatives exist, like Telegram I guess, but I perceive the list of viable alternatives to be very short. That's not to say we should accept Signal because it's inevitable, just that network size should be a strong consideration when considering how to advocate for changes or decide between potential alternatives. Example: Signal requires a phone number as an identifier. Do we spend resources lobbying Signal to accelerate deprecation of phone numbers or advocating that people use other software? In my view, the size of the user base makes lobbying Signal worth the effort.