Live data from Hacker News

I asked Signal motivations for SMS removal

news.ycombinator.com

151–160 of 258 posts

Re: I asked Signal motivations for SMS removal

#151
post #144

I think you're forgetting the main reason: the group of people using it to communicate is really small and shrinking every year. The only large group of people who still primarily use SMS to communicate person-to-person is Android users in the USA. Every other country has settled on either Telegram, WeChat, WhatsApp or FB Messenger, or other niche apps. These apps work on both iOS and Android and often also Windows.…

I have most of my friends using some messenger app and based on that I run―because I basically have to run―Whatsapp and Signal myself. But those are all people I know. What would you use but SMS when contacting people you don't? Typically, if I try to reach someone but they don't answer I'll follow up with an SMS to explain what I tried to call for. If it's a co-worker, or an acquaintance, I'll send an SMS to make su…

> What would you use but SMS when contacting people you don't?

Here in the UK, whatsapp is the default first try, at least with anyone I've interacted with. The dog groomer even messaged me on whatsapp to tell me dog is ready, completely unprompted.

Re: I asked Signal motivations for SMS removal

#152
post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's insecure by default Any proof? If you're calling MTProto 2.0 'insecure' then you should know it's already been audited multiple times in the last 2 years. If insecure means not using E2EE, then I guess the whole infrastructure of the internet is insecure. > It's not even anonymous It's more anonymous than Signal is. It requires phone number to register but you don't need to share a phone number or any personal…

> > It's insecure by default > If you're calling MTProto 2.0 'insecure' then you should know [...] If you're calling "secret chats" the default, then you should ask around or try to use telegram on desktop or just open telegram and see how much stuff is actually encrypted.

Secret chats are not the default. So Telegram can simply read them.

In whatsapp, messages have always been on-device / in-memory, where they belong, doing a p2p sync/transfer

> 1. Is There a Secret Chat On Telegram Desktop?

> No. Due to Telegram secret chat's end-to-end encryption and the requirement for permanent storage on the device (and not using the Cloud to store data), Telegram does not have the secret chat feature on Desktop or Web Telegram. They may add this feature on their desktop version in the future, but for now, it is not safe enough to have it.

Re: I asked Signal motivations for SMS removal

#153
post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's definitely in use in Europe, but it depends. I and my wife use SMS extensively, that's simply because we both use very cheap phone plans without a built-in data plan - i.e. no internet unless we have wi-fi (the pro side of that is that the yearly phone expenses is in the (equivalent of) low tens of dollars, not hundreds of dollars). When we're networked we use Line messaging. My wife's boss communicates with all…

Huh, how cheap is that? I’m almost always in wifi range, so I got the cheapest plan I could find in Germany (4€/month, so 48€/year), and even that still includes 1 GB of data (I do need the data, to sync my shopping list for example, but I’m curious how low one can go :D).

The cheapest (as in 0€/month) plan would probably be a SIM from Netzclub, but that's financed via advertisements. And then there was Congstar's "Prepaid wie ich will" (the 1st generation), which offered a "free messaging option" (1 GB / month, but only 32 kb/s) you could book every month. You just had to keep the SIM alive by topping up your credit by 15€ every 15 months (iirc). The unthrottled data options for this plan were expensive though.

Re: I asked Signal motivations for SMS removal

#154
post #21

With Signal moving away from SMS, the required messaging app stack on my phone just to be able to receive everything sent do me will have to be: - Signal -> Close friends & family I've convinced to use it. - WhatsApp -> Most of my friends. - SMS -> School notifications, 2FA, shipping updates, etc. - Facebook Messenger -> Elderly relatives - Telegram -> That one relative who wants to use this instead of Signal. Is the…

I never understood Telegram. It's insecure by default, runs in a different jurisdiction. It's not even anonymous But somehow people started using it because it was "more secure" than whatsapp.

Signal was late to market, and as much as I hate this in principle, it is unfortunate state of things.

Whatsapp has caught internationally but it's Facebook and its desktop app is a crashing dumpster fire.

Viber is another popular app, but has too many ads and visual noise.

Telegram has caught on as a good alternative for all, because it does everything good. Apps are functional, fast and stable. Interface is clean. Also Telegram channels were genius idea to increasing market penetration. Nowadays all social networks are heavily abused by bot abusing abuse feature (hehe). Basically any post containing "politics" let alone "war" content can be taken down by abuse spam. Be it facebook, twitter or reddit, all the same. So political and social "influencers" are rapidly creating backup or new main channels in the Telegram to post "controversial" information, and people reading news and blogs in Telegram will also message there too.

Re: I asked Signal motivations for SMS removal

#155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, 51 messages _sent_ per user per month, so it's not even about receiving verification SMS. > The average mobile connection sent 51 messages per month in 2020, 17 fewer than in 2019. I'd love to know the median, I assume there's a number of power users that drives up the average. Or bots that are sending out thousands of messages a day.

"Wow"? That's two messages per day. Or just one single long conversation with somoenoe per month, like organizing a dinner and going back and forth around a subject a few times. Wow, it's really dead.

Granted, I'm not in the UK, but Germany's market is somewhat similar regarding pricing etc. Not even my mother uses SMS, most people use either WhatsApp or Telegram, with some Threema and Signal mixed in.

Apparently Germany has ~8bn SMS for 160m contracts (don't ask me why there's an average of two contracts per person), which is like 50 a year. Edit: that number seems to include automated messages.

Re: I asked Signal motivations for SMS removal

#156

I think you're forgetting the main reason: the group of people using it to communicate is really small and shrinking every year. The only large group of people who still primarily use SMS to communicate person-to-person is Android users in the USA. Every other country has settled on either Telegram, WeChat, WhatsApp or FB Messenger, or other niche apps. These apps work on both iOS and Android and often also Windows.…

At this point, my entire family, including my 80 old grandmother, use Telegram for communication. I often find myself having to visit her house to show her how to “report spam and leave” random crypto groups she gets added to.

Re: I asked Signal motivations for SMS removal

#157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SMS is still rather common here in Europe. Even if a ton of people use whatsapp and such SMS is often a safe option to initiate with or something trough which you get certain kinds of automated messages like appointment reminders or verification codes.

It's still used in that sense but it's very rarely used for actually sending texts between people. Basically, SMS used to be a big revenue driver for operators. That business has dried up almost completely. The notion of paying per message is just completely gone. So, operators stopped caring about SMS a long time ago. In the same way, call minutes are increasingly less relevant. It's all about 4G and internet now.

> The notion of paying per message is just completely gone.

Not in Hungary, you still have to pay per message here unless you choose the most expensive plan.

Re: I asked Signal motivations for SMS removal

#158
post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

but… WA also doesn’t have SMS support?

But I have 40 contacts on WA, and 4 on Signal? Everyone on Signal is also on WA and SMS.

"Everyone on Signal is also on WA": not true. I'm not and I know other people who aren't. But of course, this is not the majority. And "on SMS" isn't completely true either: you can have Signal on a landline number (I do have one on my office line), which of course can't receive SMS.

Re: I asked Signal motivations for SMS removal

#159
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Matrix

Matrix has fundamental security problems that they seem unwilling to fix. Almost a polar opposite to Signal.

What security problems?

Genuinely curious, not trying to be antagonistic.

Re: I asked Signal motivations for SMS removal

#160

I think you're forgetting the main reason: the group of people using it to communicate is really small and shrinking every year. The only large group of people who still primarily use SMS to communicate person-to-person is Android users in the USA. Every other country has settled on either Telegram, WeChat, WhatsApp or FB Messenger, or other niche apps. These apps work on both iOS and Android and often also Windows.…

A bit weird for the "I don't use it so who cares" view to take a firm hold here. SMS is: 1. not controlled by a single company 2. a different network than the internet 3. a fail safe for people who don't use apps or are unable to at a given time for some reason (inc 2fa) 4. a fail safe for a "small group of people" who are suffering the consequences of a natural disaster. Though perhaps not economically feasible for…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN