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

Signal Adds Cryptocurrency Support

schneier.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 263 posts

Re: Signal Adds Cryptocurrency Support

#231

Post by Klonoar »

paulryanrogers wrote: post #141
jaywalk wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is like saying "a phone should just make phone calls!" It was true in the past, but is no longer true today.

No. Not every app needs to become an operating system for life. We can have multiple apps on a device with little to no inconvenience. Carrying multiple devices is much more cumbersome.

Ideally they don’t, but they have - go live in Asia or South America for a bit and you’ll find spots where this is the model, and Signal can’t easily (or at all) reach those users without competing.

Re: Signal Adds Cryptocurrency Support

#232

Post by jMyles »

johnchristopher wrote: post #163
jMyles wrote: post #8

I'm ready to jump over to Element (/matrix). Anybody else?

> jMyles on Aug 9, 2018 [–] > I have recently switched to Riot (built atop Marix, which the author endorses at the end) for some family communications and yeah, I think I do prefer it to Signal. So, there are indeed some matrix fanboys polluting the debate. Pfff. Shame on you.

Shame upon me?

Why?

Because I like matrix?

I scarcely used it in the past year. And I haven't really used Element at all. ...what's wrong with considering doing so?

Re: Signal Adds Cryptocurrency Support

#233

Post by ROARosen »

beojan wrote: post #217
ROARosen wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It made no sense to implement everything in one app. WeChat would disagree [1]. There is definitely a place for payments in a social app. Combine that with potential for increased user adoption because of that ("please download signal so I can pay you easily") and I don't see this as inherently bad. But they should have used a reputable coin instead of some scammy pyramid token. https://www.businessofapps.com/data/…

> There is definitely a place for payments in a social app. Not in a country that has free, (de facto) instant bank transfers (Faster Payments). If the problem there is that you need someone's bank details and not just their phone number, there's Barclays' Pingit.

The fact that there is a separate service providing instant payments does nothing to disprove my point - being that payments within a chat app is useful, if not preferred, by millions in China and elsewhere.

What exactly is the rationale that makes payments within a chat app 'inferior' or 'unneeded' just because there are separate services available (e.g. Barclays' Pingit)?

Re: Signal Adds Cryptocurrency Support

#234

Post by blueblob »

tzs wrote: post #216
aseipp wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it's the American in me, but I have almost no use for a payment mechanism in my messenger, I have too many. Venmo, Cash, Apple's thing, Google Wallet, whatever -- these all provide everything I need when I need to send money to people. Frankly the idea that I suddenly might have to have another goddamn thing is a bit irritating but I've resigned myself to it. I think the other thing is that it's just a complete…

> Maybe it's the American in me, but I have almost no use for a payment mechanism in my messenger, I have too many. Venmo, Cash, Apple's thing, Google Wallet, whatever -- these all provide everything I need when I need to send money to people. Don't forget Zelle, which is similar to Venmo but is already built into the apps and websites of a large number of US banks. It's owned indirectly by Bank of America, BB&T, Cap…

I find Zelle super frustrating. I needed to transfer money from a local credit union to Citizen's bank because there isn't a Citizen's near me. Both support Zelle, except that you can only have one account set up in Zelle. So I literally couldn't even transfer money to my other account through Zelle. Instead, I have to mobile deposit a check to myself.

Re: Signal Adds Cryptocurrency Support

#235

Post by paulryanrogers »

Klonoar wrote: post #231
paulryanrogers wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. Not every app needs to become an operating system for life. We can have multiple apps on a device with little to no inconvenience. Carrying multiple devices is much more cumbersome.

Ideally they don’t, but they have - go live in Asia or South America for a bit and you’ll find spots where this is the model, and Signal can’t easily (or at all) reach those users without competing.

Are you saying people in those regions only able to use one app on their device / phone?

Re: Signal Adds Cryptocurrency Support

#237

Post by Klonoar »

paulryanrogers wrote: post #235
Klonoar wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ideally they don’t, but they have - go live in Asia or South America for a bit and you’ll find spots where this is the model, and Signal can’t easily (or at all) reach those users without competing.

Are you saying people in those regions only able to use one app on their device / phone?

You know I'm not saying that. ;P

That's just how it winds up working there.

Re: Signal Adds Cryptocurrency Support

#238

Post by dang »

ddevault wrote: post #143
growse wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not everyone agrees that protecting a brand and controlling who connects to and uses a service you run and pay for is "being an asshole". Lots of people pretty readily made the choice to move from WhatsApp to Signal when the benefits became clear. There's nothing stopping anyone from forking the client/server and running their own network - if there are meaningful benefits to end users of the fork, there should be no…

"Protecting the brand and controlling who connects to your service" is what put Moxie in a position of power from which cryptocurrency garbage could be introduced to scam money from its users. That's all there is to it. I call that being an asshole. Nothing stops you from forking the network, except for the fact that none of the users come along. Signal holds its users hostage. I call that being an asshole. Calling i…

Come on Drew, you can't do this here. We ban accounts that do. I don't want to ban you. You're smart and do valuable work and I can feel that your heart is in the right place (edit: at least I hope it is—https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26723629 is pretty mean), but your comments that break the HN guidelines set an incredibly shitty example. You may not be coming from a mean place but plenty of other commenters will take this kind of thing as a free pass into forum hell.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Signal Adds Cryptocurrency Support

#239

Post by dang »

growse wrote: post #155
ddevault wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Protecting the brand and controlling who connects to your service" is what put Moxie in a position of power from which cryptocurrency garbage could be introduced to scam money from its users. That's all there is to it. I call that being an asshole. Nothing stops you from forking the network, except for the fact that none of the users come along. Signal holds its users hostage. I call that being an asshole. Calling i…

> "Protecting the brand and controlling who connects to your service" is what put Moxie in a position of power from which cryptocurrency garbage could be introduced to scam money from its users. That's all there is to it. I call that being an asshole. I feel sad that you're apparently so angry about a piece of software. > Nothing stops you from forking the network, except for the fact that none of the users come alon…

"Don't feed egregious comments by replying; flag them instead."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Signal Adds Cryptocurrency Support

#240

Post by kybernetikos »

Payments in chat is inevitable. I think that eventually all chat will have convenient payments or people will stop using it. Of course that doesn't necessarily mean cryptocurrencies, but until the large financial companies get involved (and they are notoriously risk averse), cryptocurrencies are a natural way to do this.

As well as secure chat already needing much of the same key management infrastructure that cryptocurrencies need, it also hooks you into social networks - so you could have key recovery schemes where you trust a number of friends to hold portions of your backup keys (somewhat like what you probably do with your real life house keys).

Trust, money and communication are all network phenomena, and using the same fabric for them all makes a lot of sense.

Post reply on HN