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

Privacy is priceless, but Signal is expensive

signal.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

501–510 of 965 posts

Re: Privacy is priceless, but Signal is expensive

#501

Post by contact9879 »

nottorp wrote: post #474
AnonHP wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s only phone number privacy from other users. Registration would still require a phone number, which is what GP seems to be unhappy about.

I don't see the point of all that encryption when the ends of a conversation are tied to publicly available info like a phone number. Do you think $SECRET_POLICE will care that they can't decrypt my messages when they know I have exchanged said messages with a known dissident's phone number? $SECRET_POLICE doesn't do innocent until proven guilty.

Signal's design for usernames and phone number privacy means they won't know

Also, dissidents aren't the only (and definitely not the primary) intended users for Signal

Re: Privacy is priceless, but Signal is expensive

#502

Post by danielheath »

rglullis wrote: post #373
Canada wrote: post #88

Seriously consider setting up a recurring donation if you prefer Signal. They have delivered consistently over the years. I set the $20/month back when they introduced the option. I'm curious what the breakdown of donations is. I only have 1 contact with a $10/month and 1 with a $5/month badge. Of course there could be others not displaying the badge. Signal really needs 500,000 people giving $20/month and plus the r…

I fail to understand the point of supporting an organization that is completely against self-sovereignty like Signal is. Why would I want to pay someone to develop something that traps me into their platform and does not offer a way out?

Given how many activists have used it in overthrowing dictatorial governments, self-sovereignty seems an odd choice of words to claim it doesn’t support.

Re: Privacy is priceless, but Signal is expensive

#504

Post by BlueTemplar »

jadyoyster wrote: post #13
craftkiller wrote: post #8

Back in the day Signal was called TextSecure and it did everything over SMS which required no centralized infrastructure aside from the cellular networks. They transitioned to internet-based messaging to support Apple devices. It seems that decision is now a 50 million dollar per year step backwards.

SMS would be a complete non-starter in Europe. Many (no?) countries lack unlimited texting plans.

Wait, still ?? Which countries ?

Re: Privacy is priceless, but Signal is expensive

#505

Post by danielheath »

wkat4242 wrote: post #390
teekert wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whatsapp got pretty big at 1 eur/year (iOS) and 1 eur for lifetime (Android) here in the netherlands. I do fear they'll loose most tech un-savvy users because they don't know how to pay (safely).

That doesn't mean they were actually profitable at those rates though. They could have been in growth hacking mode with venture backing.

They were well-known for not doing that, though.

Re: Privacy is priceless, but Signal is expensive

#506

Post by RunSet »

NoMoreNicksLeft wrote: post #443
RunSet wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's an uphill battle. I asked to recommend Session on the privacy subreddit- which the moderators denied because Session lacks a well-documented endorsement from a public figure regarded as an authority with regard to privacy. That is a non-starter specifically in the context of vetting privacy-enabling software. Anyone got a list of privacy celebrities with enough spare time to vet reddit content?

It really comes down to that? Wow. Thanks for answering though, it really bugged me, and I couldn't find anything on it.

If you ever have nothing better to do, view the revision history on the wikipedia entry for Session Private messenger and witness the petty roadblocks thrown up as objections to allowing it to have an entry.

I'll just say Session had to meet a lot of criteria merely to have a wikipedia entry that Signal's entry did not meet at the time.

To this day Session's hard-won wikipedia entry is saddled with a "limitations" entry best summarized as "Session is not Signal".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Session_(software)

Re: Privacy is priceless, but Signal is expensive

#507

Post by chimeracoder »

nurple wrote: post #477
akprasad wrote: post #255

I just donated $10 to Signal. Here's how to do so on iPhone in less than a minute: 1. Open Signal and click on your user icon in the upper left. 2. Go to "Settings" --> "Donate to Signal". 3. Click "Donate", select your donation options, and pay with Apple Pay.

I guess maybe I'm missing the purported point of signal, attaching your phone number to use it notwithstanding, but attaching payment identity to it as well? Like, what's the point of going through the pain required to use it?

> I guess maybe I'm missing the purported point of signal, attaching your phone number to use it notwithstanding, but attaching payment identity to it as well? Like, what's the point of going through the pain required to use it?

Your payment info is not connected to your account.

https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360031949872-Do...

Re: Privacy is priceless, but Signal is expensive

#508

Post by Night_Thastus »

autoexec wrote: post #431
Night_Thastus wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every single time I've seen Signal asked for data in a court case, they've basically handed back a unix timestamp of when the account was created and said "that's all we have". Or it was last access time, I could have misremembered. Either way, that seems quite good to me.

You're right, that's how it used to be. They still have pages on their website bragging about times when they didn't have anything to turn over because they didn't keep any of it. A while ago that all changed. They started collecting and forever storing in the cloud the exact data those requests were asking for. Lists of everyone you've been contacting, along with your profile data (name, phone number, photo). https:…

The technical info in that community form is a few notches too technical, I work in a different knowledge base.

If someone broke down what the timeline was, what new info is being stored that wasn't before, how that is known, and how Signal has responded, etc, then that would be useful.

I'll admit it doesn't seem great. Phone number I understand, but name and contacts are more concerning.

Re: Privacy is priceless, but Signal is expensive

#509

Post by conductr »

I'm seeing all the comments about the $6m Twilio expense, but nothing commenting on how their cost per employee is $380,000 totaling $19m. I think they could optimize this easier if the will was there. I know HN is very SV/tech centric, and that number makes sense there given the run up of VC money, etc. but I'm willing to bet they could source talent from cheaper places and slash this in half; if they wanted to. Just an observation, not my place to tell anyone how to run their business, but for a nonprofit that is trying to drum up donations to fund their operations, I'd think they would want to be leaner.

Re: Privacy is priceless, but Signal is expensive

#510

Post by jzb »

zucker42 wrote: post #434
jzb wrote: post #382

I'll probably donate, but I find it annoying that Signal only offers Linux packages for Debian-based distros. I've had headaches with the Flatpak. I would think that the Linux desktop audience - while not huge - would be the most interested in Signal. That is, might not be a lot of Linux users but percentage-wise I'd bet more Linux users are interested in Signal than macOS or Windows users. Even an AppImage would be…

Signal Desktop is available in the Arch repositories. https://archlinux.org/packages/extra/x86_64/signal-desktop/

That would be very helpful... if I ran Arch.
Post reply on HN