Follow

So signal is having technical difficulties due to user influx. Signal didn't want to decentralize because it wanted to be able to continue to provide a reliable exoerience. Yet here they are unable to provide a reliable experience BECAUSE they are centralized.

@Hawk1291 is that why I kept getting network errors today?

@Hawk1291 @djsundog You mean I can secretly talk dirty to my lady friends until they fix this shit?

centralisation 

@Hawk1291 Eh, it's a little more complicated than "decentralised stuff good". It's true that you have to rely on centralised services to be up, outside of your control. But the issue with decentralised services is that it's extremely difficult to move forwards because you have to maintain compatibility with legacy systems. This is why email sucks, and it's (partly) why Matrix sucks.

centralisation 

@cadence @Hawk1291 Matrix sucks and they don't even have to support legacy stuff yet.

centralisation 

@Arcaik @cadence @Hawk1291 My wife is on a different, smaller instance than me, and she has had several really strange technical issues pop up that I wasn't impacted by.

So if they value a consistent user experience, then Signal is right to be concerned.

Of course, when your consistent experience is "down" that's definitely not great.

@Hawk1291 Yeah, it was a darn shame when they stopped federating. My hope is with XMPP and Matrix, though I'm a little annoyed that there are two federated networks. At least they bridge nicely.

@Hawk1291 @kelbot I think that experience is the wrong word, they want to provide reliable security.

@Hawk1291 I really hope we one day see something as secure and easy to use as Signal but decentralized (that does not exist today).
That being said, that decentralized systems run by small associations and individuals would be able to cope with and addition of 40M+ users in 10 days is unsure (at best).
Here is a nice discussion about Signal versus decentralized protocols matrix.org/blog/2020/01/02/on-

@Hawk1291
Maybe they are talking about reliable in terms of security (and not user experience). Maybe not everyone is close or has the skills to keep a signal server perfectly secure.

@breizhux Expect moxie helped facebook's privacy whashing scam (whatsapp) for money, without thinking facebook's shady behaviour might hurt his (or Signal crypto protocol's) reputation.

But did everything he could to fight federation and third-party clients without google's crap, making it difficult to have Signal clients chat just work out on the box on on ungooglised androids (no google api, not even micros @Hawk1291 - 1/2

or whatever pts called). Not to mention non-android Linux phones… Because "its bad for security"

@Hawk1291 @breizhux - 2/2

@devnull
Yes, but that's another problem... and langis was created to provide a signal without Google...
Moreover, I saw that signal no longer integrates the Google analytics service (according to exodus) ! This shows some improvement.
And from a security point of view, no other messaging system has proven itself as far as I know ...
@Hawk1291

@breizhux As far as I know, some XMPP clients support OMEMO crypto.

I know about Langis. But it's doesn't solve the problem, Which is Moxie being an asshole to third party clients' dev.

As far as I know, Langis relies only on one person, for one platform (google-free android). If Moxie weren't an asshole, maybe non-android Linux phones users (Sailfish, Ububtouch, PureOS, maybe even maemo-leste in the future, @Hawk1291 - 1/4

or whatever) could have, or could get (well-maintained, and up-to-date) clients¹ for Signal. Or at least, chances for that to happen would be higher. Moxie clearly doesn't give a fuck about non-android users. Not many devs would want to get involved with Signal, and of Moxie's "asshole-itude" is one of the reasons.

Also, Signal choice to use phone number as an ID of annoying. What if you want to communicate with someone *only on @breizhux @Hawk1291 - 2/4

Signal* but don't want to give them your phone number, or want to use "one or multiple pseudonymes, independent from other PII", or just doesn't want to restart from scratch when you change your phone number ? The answer is, like usual, "If you want to use it otherwise than what I decided, go fuck yourself"

1. I mean "real" clients with serious work behind, not some unsecure web crap (a la electron) done quick and dirty, in a @breizhux @Hawk1291 - 3/4

@Hawk1291 I hope people do realize now why centralization always sucks.

@Hawk1291

It's actually the exact opposite. If Signal was decentralised, such an exodus would either have lead to people flocking to a big "main" instance, which would not have taken the load.

This instance could have stopped accepting newcomers(like mastodon), but that would just have lead to less people actually making the switch, or them flooding smaller instances which can't take the load either.

The newcomers are non tech savvy. No new instances would have appeared to take the load.

@dreeg @Hawk1291 This 100%. Centralized = better control, Decentralized = better reliability. What we have here is a Coke vs Pepsi kind of issue.

@dreeg @Hawk1291 Let me rephrase. Decentralized = no single point of failure.

@dreeg
I think its very likely some new instances would be set up (likely more set up by existing users rather than newcomers?)

Whether enough would be set up to facilitate such a huge influx seamlessly is however another question @Hawk1291

@dreeg @Hawk1291 Here are some thoughts on centralized vs federated messengers. Matrix has 35% of users on the default instance which is a good number and seems to be going down. matrix.org/blog/2020/01/02/on-

@cos @dreeg @Hawk1291 *runs own single-user personal instances for both Pleroma and Matrix*

@Hawk1291 I never thought moxie's argument for centralisation made sense.

The convenience of hashing all phone numbers to grow contact lists more easily doesn't smell right to me.

Iexpect in a few years we'll find out that the US-funded US-operated US-hosted signal has a few carefully selected data leaks, just enough info to allow NSA etc to siphon off the "social graph of signal".

That being said, threema & signal are both awesome and far better than the ad-funded alternatives.

@stunder I use a variety of messengers. Matrix, wire, xmpp, signal. Matrix is my favorite. I tried Session a while back. I think they have made some major improvements since then and wouldn't mind giving it another try. It wasn't very reliable at the time and multi clients were an issue too iirc.

@Hawk1291 "Signal didn't want to decentralize because it wanted to be able to continue to provide a reliable exoerience."

Bullcrap. It's all about control. If you are centralized, you have oversight for every part of it. They simple like control. I'd use Signal even if they drop the stupid "give us your phonenumber" thing.

I can't believe how many sheep registered just because Musk or Dorsey said so.
Sign in to participate in the conversation
Fosstodon

Fosstodon is an English speaking Mastodon instance that is open to anyone who is interested in technology; particularly free & open source software.