Why this particular coin that nobody uses? This seems weird. Is this a monetisation scheme we should be worried about?
Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cryptocurrency
21–30 of 665 posts
Re: Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cryptocurrency
#22This is garbage, and shouldn't be part of Signal. Everything on the internet is being corrupted with adding cryptocurrency scams where they absolutely don't belong, it turns Signal from an obvious recommendation into something that makes me hesitate. There's something to be said for focusing on doing one thing well, and that doesn't mean turning a communication platform into a kitchen sink.
Signal is competing against some big players in the messaging space, at least some of which have money transfers. As long as they abide by their principles and none of these features impact privacy, I don't see how it wouldn't be viewed as a win.
A case could be made for it being bloat, but most consumers don't care, and for Signal (or any messaging app) to be successful, it needs to appeal to the common denominator.
And frankly, if this means I can send money to a friend without Google getting yet more data about me, then even better.
Re: Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cryptocurrency
#23What are the KYC requirements? I'm going to assume that it's none, since it's privacy focused
Does KYC apply to all transactions or only to purchase of currency? Because I can get bank notes from an ATM and pay anyone in cash without having an intermediary verify my identity when money changes hands.
Not over certain spending limits you can’t.
Re: Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cryptocurrency
#24Is your backend open source, or not? Haven’t seen the git updated in a while.
Effectively not anymore. Here is a very recent german article about it: https://www.golem.de/news/crypto-messenger-signal-server-nic...
No updates in the repo for over a year and no answers from the team. The whole crypto currency thing is also a red flag for me. Matrix seems to be the better option by now...
Re: Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cryptocurrency
#25The technology is cool, but I don't really know if I want KYC regulatory risk in my encrypted messaging client. I just want italics.
I don't think Signal has any plans to scan your driver's license. What they've built is a non-custodial wallet (IE, they can't help you if you lose your keys, and they have no ability to authorize or deny a payment on your behalf).
In my opinion a lot of the spicy regulatory issues around coins with private transactions are still not fully realized because none of them have mainstream adoption. The problem here is that Signal's goal to succeed as a mainstream encrypted messaging client could have the unpleasant side effect of bringing this technology under regulatory scrutiny.
Hopefully things won't come to that, of course...
Re: Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cryptocurrency
#26I don't know if crypto is good or bad, but I can't imagine this feature driving Signal uptake. It would be better to focus on allowing ordinary payments in GBP via Signal. Even if the payments themselves weren't private, the messages still would be.
Re: Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cryptocurrency
#27This is garbage, and shouldn't be part of Signal. Everything on the internet is being corrupted with adding cryptocurrency scams where they absolutely don't belong, it turns Signal from an obvious recommendation into something that makes me hesitate. There's something to be said for focusing on doing one thing well, and that doesn't mean turning a communication platform into a kitchen sink.
Signal is competing against some big players in the messaging space, at least some of which have money transfers. As long as they abide by their principles and none of these features impact privacy, I don't see how it wouldn't be viewed as a win. A case could be made for it being bloat, but most consumers don't care, and for Signal (or any messaging app) to be successful, it needs to appeal to the common denominator.…
Signal needs to be reliable, safe and have a low barrier of entry to achieve its goals of allowing widespread private communication. I thought that when I recommended that my peer group use it (at this point, all of my normal contacts use it extensively), I could trust that it would remain clearly focused on its mission- now I'll need to recommend it with a caveat to just click through the scam marketing, ICO offers and "airdrops".
Re: Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cryptocurrency
#28The UK already has faster payments in all major banks. I can send and receive money instantly from app or Web. Will yours be as fast as that? The UK has a problem with authorised push payment fraud. Banks can recover funds which have been sent as a result of phishing / fraud. How can I reverse a payment on your platform if it was fraudulent? The UK also has receiver verification. If I try to send to an account and it…
>>The UK already has faster payments in all major banks. I can send and receive money instantly from app or Web. Will yours be as fast as that?
A: MobileCoin is as fast (or faster in some cases) than a bank payment in the UK with greater privacy. As far as settling back to Fiat, if that's what you're asking about, the velocity of that depends on on-ramp and off-ramp integrations which will come over time (but it looks like there's no reason MobileCoin can't help developers deliver payments at the same speed as banks).
>>The UK has a problem with authorised push payment fraud. Banks can recover funds which have been sent as a result of phishing / fraud. How can I reverse a payment on your platform if it was fraudulent?
A: Payments on MobileCoin cannot be reversed at the protocol level. If you want escrow and reversibility, you should use a wallet or payment service that supports those primitives. We believe that developers will build such services on top of the foundation of the MobileCoin protocol.
>>The UK also has receiver verification. If I try to send to an account and it doesn't match the name I'm sending to, my bank will warn me. How do you stop impersonation?
A: Signal relies on phone numbers for identities. Other apps that integrate MobileCoin may have a higher threshold for identification.
>>There's no cost to sending payments on most mainstream banks. How much do you charge?
A: Fees are set by the foundation (which has a stated goal of keeping transaction fees to around $.04 when the network isn't congested). Currently fees are higher as they need to be adjusted by a foundation vote.
>>Most banks let the user block receiving payments from specific accounts. How do you stop harassers sending unwanted money?
A: Signal doesn't allow people you haven't keypaired with to send you funds. If you have accepted a message request from someone, they can send you money.
Re: Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cryptocurrency
#29This is garbage, and shouldn't be part of Signal. Everything on the internet is being corrupted with adding cryptocurrency scams where they absolutely don't belong, it turns Signal from an obvious recommendation into something that makes me hesitate. There's something to be said for focusing on doing one thing well, and that doesn't mean turning a communication platform into a kitchen sink.
If they didn't use some random 'coin' no one has heard of I'd be on board. They're trying to compete in a bad way. They should simply just use Stripe and be done with it. People want an alternative to facebook messaging and PayPal. They don't want superfluous cryptos.
Re: Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cryptocurrency
#30oh here we go..
I can't wait till we stop sprinkling bitcoin over everything. At least when we go back to ads we'll stop getting the spam from bots trying to claim their free $0.00003 in cryptocoin of the week