4 ms·

> So I’m not sure why Signal should drop them other than because of the general volatility in crypto. The affiliation to a cryptoscheme casts the entirety of S

> So I’m not sure why Signal should drop them other than because of the general volatility in crypto. The affiliation to a cryptoscheme casts the entirety of Signal in a disreputable light. Not least because it gets Signal tangled up in stories like this one.

dmix 4y ago
They should act to avoid guilt by association?
- lxgr 4y ago
  "Association" hardly seems like the correct term for marketing a fringe cryptocurrency to unsophisticated users/retail investors.
  - dmix 4y ago
    Moxie was a technical advisor for mobilecoin, helping people send money privately sounds like a noble pursuit to me. At least it has a real world use case + legitimate real world userbase/implementation. Most crypto companies don't have that.
    - benatkin 4y ago
      I don't think a messenger should provide a way to transfer money. It is one reason I hate Facebook Messenger. I liked Signal more before then because of its focus on messaging.
- ummonk 4y ago
  No one said anything about legal guilt. It's generally good practice not to associate with fraudsters if you care about your reputation though.
  - dmix 4y ago
    “Guilt by association” doesn’t imply legal guilt? It’s a common euphemism and it fits exactly what you’re describing. Signal has often valued being technically correct over pandering to media narratives for marketing reasons.
    - skorpeon87 4y ago
      Rage against it all you want, people are judged by the company they keep. Ideally not in court rooms, but in everyday life? Abso-fucking-lutely. You don't have to like it but that's how life works.
    - stefan_ 4y ago
      Whats "technically correct"? You think making a money sending feature using a currency that has random 1000% swings from fraudsters is "technically correct"? It's fucking useless garbage is what it is. Good thing their users didn't buy into the fraud seeing how this scam has no volume (ironically enabling this scam).

dmix 4y ago

They should act to avoid guilt by association?

lxgr 4y ago
"Association" hardly seems like the correct term for marketing a fringe cryptocurrency to unsophisticated users/retail investors.
- dmix 4y ago
  Moxie was a technical advisor for mobilecoin, helping people send money privately sounds like a noble pursuit to me. At least it has a real world use case + legitimate real world userbase/implementation. Most crypto companies don't have that.
  - benatkin 4y ago
    I don't think a messenger should provide a way to transfer money. It is one reason I hate Facebook Messenger. I liked Signal more before then because of its focus on messaging.
ummonk 4y ago
No one said anything about legal guilt. It's generally good practice not to associate with fraudsters if you care about your reputation though.
- dmix 4y ago
  “Guilt by association” doesn’t imply legal guilt? It’s a common euphemism and it fits exactly what you’re describing. Signal has often valued being technically correct over pandering to media narratives for marketing reasons.
  - skorpeon87 4y ago
    Rage against it all you want, people are judged by the company they keep. Ideally not in court rooms, but in everyday life? Abso-fucking-lutely. You don't have to like it but that's how life works.
  - stefan_ 4y ago
    Whats "technically correct"? You think making a money sending feature using a currency that has random 1000% swings from fraudsters is "technically correct"? It's fucking useless garbage is what it is. Good thing their users didn't buy into the fraud seeing how this scam has no volume (ironically enabling this scam).