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

Signal walks the line between anarchism and pragmatism

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 342 posts

Re: Signal walks the line between anarchism and pragmatism

#81

Post by domh »

XorNot wrote: post #46

Signal would be a lot more pragmatic if they would develop a funding model based on selling something for actual money, rather then subsisting off donations. Sell "Signal for Business" accounts or something so I can stop having my bank or local government depend on SMS to communicate with me. I know a number of doctors who'd really love to be able to use Signal to talk to their patients (and would tell them to instal…

I agree with this! But they seem to have backed themselves into a corner where anything pro-business automatically has to be anti-privacy so they dont do it. I guess there must be some technical challenges to opening up Signal APIs to third parties?

I was against WhatsApp for Business until I had to use it to communicate with Virgin Atlantic. It was so much better than getting on the phone to call them! It probably took longer overall whilst waiting an hour or two between replies, but having a history of the conversation and knowing there's someone reading my request in full and replying properly was great.

I dont know why Signal are wasting their time with cryptocurrency projects, whilst the normal app seems pretty stagnant. I'd love a 3rd party API or bot system that was done in a tasteful and private way, but I dont believe there are any plans for it.

Re: Signal walks the line between anarchism and pragmatism

#82

Post by bombolo »

safety1st wrote: post #62
wolverine876 wrote: post #2

> The motivations that led to end-to-end encryption going mainstream lie far out on the political fringe. The original impetus for Marlinspike’s entry into cryptography, around 2007, was to challenge existing power structures, particularly the injustice of how (as he put it) “Internet insecurity is used by people I don’t like against people I do: the government against the people.” But sticking to anarchism would imp…

What sets the modern era apart from the rest of human history is that Marlinspike's ideas are radical yet commonplace at the same time. He's in the company of people like Thomas Jefferson who advocated the idea of permanent revolution, or that the rebellion against unjust government would never end. It would keep on happening through the ballot box. That is what democracy is. It is continuous small, non-violent revol…

I remember, as a young italian studying about risorgimento, asking my mother why did the people in venice and milan not want to be under the austrian empire.

My mum told me "it was an oppressive government". When I asked to elaborate she said "they used to read people's mails so that they knew whom to arrest."

In italy you can end up in jail if you open mails… and yet somehow we are completely ok with the government reading every electronic communication?

Re: Signal walks the line between anarchism and pragmatism

#83

Post by bombolo »

sudosysgen wrote: post #44
mc32 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was about introducing sex ed to third graders. Have third graders put down their toy cars, dolls and blocks yet? And then you have a Cal governor suinf a school dist demanding they teach the curriculum he believes is correct. So you have an example of two governors, one on each side, tellig districts what to teach But, the thing is, liberals _used_ _to_ espouse free speech as long as it was legal and defended it…

I've gone through sex ed in third grade. All I learnt was what the name of the body parts are, that I shouldn't let other people touch them in inappropriate ways, and that boys and girls have different things going on there. I don't see why it isn't appropriate and why a 9 year old shouldn't know this.

Because rich conservatives don't want the poor class to have a decent education… too dangerous.

Sex education is just part of the trend.

Re: Signal walks the line between anarchism and pragmatism

#84

Post by kristofferg »

wolverine876 wrote: post #71
dang wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It set off the flamewar detector. (the usual answer)

Thanks for the explanation. My flame detector goes off all the time when we're cooking - you need to open a window and let in some fresh air. ;) :D

Might help with the detector - but not the flames :)

Re: Signal walks the line between anarchism and pragmatism

#85

Post by edrxty »

autoexec wrote: post #50
greyface- wrote: post #4

No mention of criticism for requiring use of phone numbers as identifiers. Falsely claims phone numbers are not linked to usernames.

Worse, they store your phone number (along with your name, your photo, and most damning of all, a list of all of your signal contacts) permanently in the cloud. This is exactly the information they used to brag about not being able to turn over to the authorities because they didn't collect it in the first place. Their website still has pages that brag about that with no indication that it's no longer the truth. I've…

Signal is very much a first generation private messaging application (in the sense that it was the first generation actually adopted). I think we're starting to see true gen 2 protocols rise to fix some of the issues it has like matrix, berty, briar, etc.

Re: Signal walks the line between anarchism and pragmatism

#86

Post by espe »

kornhole wrote: post #67

Or Signal could be the most well orchestrated honey pot. The server code is already partially closed source. What I don't understand is how a small organization like that cannot be convinced or compelled by a very powerful government intelligence agency. I will stick with decentralized protocols I can host myself.

this. also, they have a payment feature that opens them up further on grounds of regulatory scrutiny.

Re: Signal walks the line between anarchism and pragmatism

#87

Post by pjerem »

k_bx wrote: post #70
XorNot wrote: post #46

Signal would be a lot more pragmatic if they would develop a funding model based on selling something for actual money, rather then subsisting off donations. Sell "Signal for Business" accounts or something so I can stop having my bank or local government depend on SMS to communicate with me. I know a number of doctors who'd really love to be able to use Signal to talk to their patients (and would tell them to instal…

They've established their name and reputation, now they need to build on top of that. Like Mozilla and their VPN product, Signal can do a similar thing, keeping the Signal free.

I would be surprised if Mozilla’s VPN was a substantial source of income. They are just reselling Mullvad’s VPN but for double price.

That’s incredibly lazy and I hope Signal will find something more ambitious.

Re: Signal walks the line between anarchism and pragmatism

#88

Post by coldblues »

greyface- wrote: post #4

No mention of criticism for requiring use of phone numbers as identifiers. Falsely claims phone numbers are not linked to usernames.

Whenever this is mentioned, the answer is always the ease of adoption. Less tech literate people can just use their phone number and they won't have to bother themselves with anything else.

Re: Signal walks the line between anarchism and pragmatism

#89

Post by kelnos »

XorNot wrote: post #35
gcanyon wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a case to be made that encryption/private communication has gone through the same sort of progress as personal weaponry has, only on a much shorter time frame and to a much greater extent. In weaponry, it's taken ~200 years to go from bespoke muskets with a firing rate of a couple rounds per minute to semi-automatic and automatic weapons capable of firing multiple rounds per second. In just the last 20-30 yea…

I'm real uncomfortable with comparing kinetic weaponry to communications encryption. These aren't even remotely similar things in damage scope. The argument in favor of private communications is in fact predicated on this: no one can actually cause damage just by communicating. Damage might happen as a result of it, but there is no information so dangerous that the transmission of it must be known up front, and shoul…

> I'm real uncomfortable with comparing kinetic weaponry to communications encryption.

Same. The purpose of kinetic weaponry -- even when used in self defense -- is to injure and kill.

Communications encryption has so many varied uses, there's just no comparison.

Re: Signal walks the line between anarchism and pragmatism

#90

Post by kelnos »

skybrian wrote: post #65
autoexec wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We've seen example after example of the Fourth Amendment being trampled all over with zero consequences. Why bother arguing over possible edge cases (and I personally don't see any reason online communications wouldn't be covered) when there are no meaningful consequences for even the most cut and dry violations. Like, why argue the finer points of a right that we effectively don't have?

In a large country, I think it could be true that there are many violations of a rule, and at the same time, the rule is often enforced and is doing some good. I haven’t researched it, though.

And on top of that, for the most part we only hear about the violations. The rule being followed won't make the news.

That doesn't mean the violations are acceptable, of course.

Post reply on HN