Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Signal and Giphy

whispersystems.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 125 posts

Re: Signal and Giphy

#111

Post by nilved »

mnx wrote: post #2

This is a clever way to do this, but it still seems like someone caring about their privacy should just do without gifs. Edit: I should rephrase - I mean someone with a larger-than-usual need for privacy, someone paranoid for a reason. This is great for the typical privacy concious user. But if I was sending documents to WikiLeaks, I would not sum them up with a cute GIF.

This is Signal jumping the shark. Why is searching gifs their responsibility? Non-essential features should be skipped there is a single shred of security concern, which we can see there is.

Re: Signal and Giphy

#112

Post by myowncrapulence »

uola wrote: post #56
brainfire wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surely missing features would make it the "lesser version of something else."

A feature like this doesn't really matter in the context of competing with mainstream messaging services because their value is to a large extent in things like brand and network effect. The notion that you're just one feature away from mainstream adaptation is often a misconception. In reality there's limited potential in living in the shadow of something else.

I absolutely agree. Instagram/Facebook/Soundcloud have lost my interest as they've added extra features which just clutter the UI and distract from the purpose you were using the site in the first place.

If your original product isn't working. Maybe try being a different company.

Re: Signal and Giphy

#113

Post by zlatan_todoric »

Oh great, they are catching up with Wire (https://wire.com/).

Now if they would just resolve real bugs (like many people not being able to register to Signal), that would be maybe cool (but as they implemented Signal Protocol to WhatsApp and others (if we can trust code we can't see) I can't say I see any point in it).

Maybe I am wrong, but it lost that appeal it had some time in past.

Re: Signal and Giphy

#114

Post by piotrjurkiewicz »

mahyarm wrote: post #105
piotrjurkiewicz wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you kidding me? Do you consider this Chrome extension as a 'real app' (sic!)? I won't install Chrome just to host Signal extension.

Almost every modern desktop chat app is a web app, which is what a chrome app is. It's how something like franz is possible: http://meetfranz.com/

I all cases of 'modern desktop chat app' you are talking about, I can use it by opening its website with any modern browser.

Signal is the only one which requires me to install one particular browser.

Re: Signal and Giphy

#115

Post by thaumasiotes »

AndrewUnmuted wrote: post #52
nfrmatk wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should those of us who care about privacy be required to limit the media we use to express ourselves? By including this functionality Open Whisper Systems is giving the privacy conscious a way (albeit experimental) to have our cake and eat it too.

Someone else made that media. They're the one expressing something. You, the consumer of that media, are just a distributor of their work.

When Ben Franklin said "those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety", he was making the point that, in his eyes, it would be foolish for the government of Pennsylvania, seeking help from the Penn family, to give up their freedom to levy taxes on the Penn family. When someone uses the same quote today, are they making the same point?

Martin Luther King was a full-throated advocate of affirmative action, which is to say applying penalties to white people for being white. When someone today talks about "a nation where [people] will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character", are they supporting the same idea?

Re: Signal and Giphy

#116

Post by moosingin3space »

Joeboy wrote: post #75
Vinnl wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not perfect, but: https://whispersystems.org/blog/signal-desktop/

Because I know moxie comes here sometimes: I can live with it being a Chrome app, but I'd really like it if I could use it to send messages to people who don't have Signal (like I can with the Android app). Signal mostly takes the path of being a drop-in replacement for my SMS app, so it seems a shame not to do the same here.

Wouldn't it then require a connection to the phone? Signal Desktop today doesn't need to connect to the phone.

Re: Signal and Giphy

#117

Post by Joeboy »

moosingin3space wrote: post #116
Joeboy wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because I know moxie comes here sometimes: I can live with it being a Chrome app, but I'd really like it if I could use it to send messages to people who don't have Signal (like I can with the Android app). Signal mostly takes the path of being a drop-in replacement for my SMS app, so it seems a shame not to do the same here.

Wouldn't it then require a connection to the phone? Signal Desktop today doesn't need to connect to the phone.

Ah, I suppose that makes sense. I thought it worked via the phone.

Re: Signal and Giphy

#118

Post by petre »

tdkl wrote: post #21
petre wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It clutters the UI with unecessary stuff. Wire also provides such a misfeature. I would rather disable it, but cannot.

You have to specifically click a button to use it. That's a good compromise between jumping through hoops to enable it if opt-in.

In Signal is hidden under the post button, you can easily ignore it. In Wire it's on a toolbar and clutters the UI.

Re: Signal and Giphy

#119

Post by hk__2 »

Reading this title I thought it was a word play on “Signal and Noise” and it’d be a post about how /giphy adds noise to Slack conversations.

Re: Signal and Giphy

#120

Post by lorenzhs »

MikusR wrote: post #96
h4waii wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you on about? You can enable on-screen buttons while still having physical capacitive buttons. http://m.imgur.com/u5hcJYQ Many 3rd party custom ROMs have the feature, including CyanogenMod, the most widespread open-source build of AOSP.

Not on stock Samsung phones.

So they made a screencast and blended it with a video of a hand touching a phone to avoid shadows and improve image quality. Is that really your takeaway from the article?
Post reply on HN