41–50 of 276 posts
These messaging apps are worse than... well, I don't know. This is as bad as it gets. Bicycles maybe? Incompatibility, fragmentation.. the worst thing you can have for application that is supposed to be used for communication.
Shame they went there instead of to Signal, but I guess it may still be a marginal improvement.
Signal, and in extension the other privacy-aware messengers (Threema etc), can not replace Telegram or iMessage because they lack basic features like multi-device sync. The hard problem of messaging has not been solved yet, what people should build is a service like iMessage but with the public key pool per account publicly auditable and verifiable.
They just want a pretty GUI, their friends to be on it, and an easy way to send videos/photos/voicemails/whatever.
Granted, I've never wanted to send videos and sending photos works well on Signal right now. But until recently the GUI wasn't very polished.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Signal, and in extension the other privacy-aware messengers (Threema etc), can not replace Telegram or iMessage because they lack basic features like multi-device sync. The hard problem of messaging has not been solved yet, what people should build is a service like iMessage but with the public key pool per account publicly auditable and verifiable.
This has to be a joke. Multi-device sync? Most people don't know what that is. They just want a pretty GUI, their friends to be on it, and an easy way to send videos/photos/voicemails/whatever. Granted, I've never wanted to send videos and sending photos works well on Signal right now. But until recently the GUI wasn't very polished.
Interestingly, Fitch downgraded Brazil's Debt to junk yesterday. http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/057c1240-a40f-11e5-b73f-95454... Anti-technology culture tells a lot about an economy, group or nation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's quite literally multi-device >>sync Seems like a low effort solution and would not satisfy my requirements, but it probably works for some people.
This is false. I've tested this possibility by turning off phone and Signal Desktop still receives messages. Description of plan around which protocol was build is here [0]. [0]: https://gist.github.com/TheBlueMatt/d2fcfb78d29faca117f5
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Signal, and in extension the other privacy-aware messengers (Threema etc), can not replace Telegram or iMessage because they lack basic features like multi-device sync. The hard problem of messaging has not been solved yet, what people should build is a service like iMessage but with the public key pool per account publicly auditable and verifiable.
This has to be a joke. Multi-device sync? Most people don't know what that is. They just want a pretty GUI, their friends to be on it, and an easy way to send videos/photos/voicemails/whatever. Granted, I've never wanted to send videos and sending photos works well on Signal right now. But until recently the GUI wasn't very polished.
Shame they went there instead of to Signal, but I guess it may still be a marginal improvement.
Signal, and in extension the other privacy-aware messengers (Threema etc), can not replace Telegram or iMessage because they lack basic features like multi-device sync. The hard problem of messaging has not been solved yet, what people should build is a service like iMessage but with the public key pool per account publicly auditable and verifiable.
Multi-device sync and privacy-awareness both are maybe reasons for a few individuals to switch but they both have problem with the number one feature of messengers: actually reaching other people.
Why something gets adopted is way more dependent on soft factors than on technical factors, as long as the basic requirements are satisfied.
Shame they went there instead of to Signal, but I guess it may still be a marginal improvement.
Signal, and in extension the other privacy-aware messengers (Threema etc), can not replace Telegram or iMessage because they lack basic features like multi-device sync. The hard problem of messaging has not been solved yet, what people should build is a service like iMessage but with the public key pool per account publicly auditable and verifiable.
I know only 1 guy who uses Signal and he is an AT&T systems administrator and linux addict. He understands the difference. The rest, use either iMessage or Telegram and don't really care about the rest.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This has to be a joke. Multi-device sync? Most people don't know what that is. They just want a pretty GUI, their friends to be on it, and an easy way to send videos/photos/voicemails/whatever. Granted, I've never wanted to send videos and sending photos works well on Signal right now. But until recently the GUI wasn't very polished.
Of course they know what that is - and actively use it - just think of Facebook messenger.
In fact, Brazil's most popular chatting app that is recently banned there doesn't have multi-device sync. Hangouts does. Everyone could use hangouts, but not nearly as many people do.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have used both, but never heard of Signal I'll try it.
+1 for Signal (used to be TextSecure). They now have a desktop app in beta which synchronises perfectly with my mobile
Can Signal be taken down like WhatsApp if the same happens again in the future?