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

951–960 of 965 posts

Re: Privacy is priceless, but Signal is expensive

#951

Post by darthrupert »

fransje26 wrote: post #800
darthrupert wrote: post #758

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll ask the question you're implying out loud. Why does an organization with about 50 employees need 4 C-level executives, totalling about 2M compensation per year? Or perhaps it's 7 C-level executives (3 hiding under the "Software developer" title) totalling about 3,7M compensation per year? I'm absolutely not donating money to such a thing without an answer to this question. As a counterpoint, I am a member of a l…

> We estimate that by 2025, Signal will require approximately $50 million dollars a year to operate And from the link: https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/824... - Other Salaries and Wages $9,665,761 - Executive Compensation $744,037 So about $10,400,000 a year in compensation and wages, or about 21% of their running costs.

So if I give 5 euros, 1 of this will go to salaries. I'd say not terrible. I wouldn't be surprised if most charities are worse.

One just have to get over the feeling that I'm donating to a charity of people who make 50x more money than I do with a comparable skill set.

Re: Privacy is priceless, but Signal is expensive

#952

Post by tobinfricke »

gwd wrote: post #863
tobinfricke wrote: post #631

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reminds me of ... WhatsApp :D (Originally WhatsApp charged $1/year.)

And I was SOOO happy when I heard WhatsApp's business model: Finally, I'M THE CUSTOMER! I gladly signed up for the "free year" and started getting other people to sign up for it... only to have it bought by FB, and never charged my $1 yearly fee. :-( Then I tried to get people to use Telegram, but hey never implemented encryption by default, instead implementing things like chatrooms with millions of people... then I…

Yup. Same, re: WhatsApp and the $1 annual fee. It made so much sense "lightweight service, charge $1/year, have 1 billion customers."

These days I use Signal mainly. But also WhatsApp. And Messenger. And SMS for folks who don't have any of the others.

And my iPhone friends complain about how terrible it is to text Android-users, because iMessage.

Oh I should add that it seems that college students these days have standardized on messaging through ... instagram.

Re: Privacy is priceless, but Signal is expensive

#953

Post by johnnyanmac »

xtracto wrote: post #859
waffleiron wrote: post #802

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are they? These salaries are much lower than most tech competitors. That really depends on the location these people are working from. In most of the world, those are insanely high salaries. A company like this doesn't need to be based in SV.

I tended to agree with your sentiment. But the reality is that for some unknown reason to me, it's companies from SV the ones that get famous and used globally. Why didn't this start from say Mexico? Or Singapore or Vietnam? Or at least Germany which has a good record of freedom conscious tech scene . My bet is in something related to the "maslow pyramid": people in SV have so much money that have everything solved i…

1. It's a network effect. If you're raised around doctors, go to school with prospective doctors, and your school gets many university recruits from a good doctor college, you will strive to be a doctor more likely than not. SV had a bunch of tech companies and falls into the same kind of environment.

2. It's probably a matter of Venture capitalists. Even if you aren't from SV, you may strive to go there to get funding for a pitch or find talent. Similar to your prospective actor that moves to Hollywood. Go where the crowds are.

Now, we can ponder why SV became a tech hub, but current market forces makes it ripe for tech startups.

Re: Privacy is priceless, but Signal is expensive

#954

Post by johnnyanmac »

i8comments wrote: post #937
jwestbury wrote: post #785

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> which I agree are a problem Are they? These salaries are much lower than most tech competitors. I know we like to call out "high" salaries when a useful service is struggling - but they'll struggle even more if they can't retain good talent because their pay is too low. There's a reason tech skill in government is generally lower than that in industry, for instance.

Salaries for executives in most tech competitors are inflated and should go down, starting with Signal.

Is 700k for a CEO really that inflated? You can probably find a few people here in HN as an IC making even more money at some top tech company.

Re: Privacy is priceless, but Signal is expensive

#955

Post by johnnyanmac »

jillesvangurp wrote: post #836
jwestbury wrote: post #785

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> which I agree are a problem Are they? These salaries are much lower than most tech competitors. I know we like to call out "high" salaries when a useful service is struggling - but they'll struggle even more if they can't retain good talent because their pay is too low. There's a reason tech skill in government is generally lower than that in industry, for instance.

Nonsense. Asking for donations as a millionaire (which is what these people are) is a bit awkward. This only makes sense if you ignore the world outside the Bay area and assume it's a talentless wasteland. Bay area salaries are vastly inflated in terms of value for money. There is lots of talent elsewhere of course. I live in Europe. Lots of smart people here. I think I personally know quite a few people that could d…

Maybe EU is underpaid instead of Bay area overpaid?

But it's hard to compare EU and US salaries directly. You got taxed way more and your health care isn't bound to your job.

Re: Privacy is priceless, but Signal is expensive

#956

Post by johnnyanmac »

pelasaco wrote: post #900
taway1237 wrote: post #857

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So all the programmers who work there should live on thin air? I agree that ideally the management should not be there for profit, but come on, the salaries are not even that crazy. I suspect FAANG key employees in that area easily earn multiples of that.

> Signal is competing with for profit companies for talented engineers and their > talented leaders. In Bay Area? I'm quite sure you get great people all around the World, or in USA, by much less.

That line of thought is exactly why FAAMG companies tried to lower salaries for CoL when they opened up to more remote roles. I don't know if thst was fair, but it wasn't something appreciated by many engineers during the pandemic.

It's also how and why long ago they tried to outsource a lot of engineering. They still do try. But that's not an easy transition either.

Re: Privacy is priceless, but Signal is expensive

#957

Post by johnnyanmac »

pelasaco wrote: post #901
taway1237 wrote: post #857

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So all the programmers who work there should live on thin air? I agree that ideally the management should not be there for profit, but come on, the salaries are not even that crazy. I suspect FAANG key employees in that area easily earn multiples of that.

> So all the programmers who work there should live on thin air? We are talking about C*, Engineer Manager, getting almost 700k/year. Not developers.

Yes, so what's the problem?

Re: Privacy is priceless, but Signal is expensive

#958

Post by johnnyanmac »

unsungNovelty wrote: post #876
EduardoBautista wrote: post #773

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A nonprofit doesn't mean it's a charity.

> 501(c)(3) tax-exemptions apply to entities that are organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, literary or educational purposes, for testing for public safety, to foster national or international amateur sports competition, or for the prevention of cruelty to children or animals. Signal foundation is a non-profit 501(c)(3). It is literally and legally a charity.

Charities aren't charities in the colloquial sense of the word. It's not a truly altruistic collaboration of volunteers giving their time to help a cause.

Non-profit simply means that every bit of revenue made goes back into the company instead of given out to shareholders. Which includes paying your labor.

It being a non-profit is exactly why we can view the operating expenses and salaries of the public facing executives. For accountability.

Re: Privacy is priceless, but Signal is expensive

#959

Post by pelasaco »

johnnyanmac wrote: post #957
pelasaco wrote: post #901

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So all the programmers who work there should live on thin air? We are talking about C*, Engineer Manager, getting almost 700k/year. Not developers.

Yes, so what's the problem?

> Yes, so what's the problem?

What is the problem of managers of a non-profit company earning around 700k/year and the company is writing blog posts complaining that the the company operation is too expensive? I think if you read it aloud, you will understand it.

Re: Privacy is priceless, but Signal is expensive

#960

Post by johnnyanmac »

pelasaco wrote: post #959
johnnyanmac wrote: post #957

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, so what's the problem?

> Yes, so what's the problem? What is the problem of managers of a non-profit company earning around 700k/year and the company is writing blog posts complaining that the the company operation is too expensive? I think if you read it aloud, you will understand it.

When the numbers total $50m in operations and the CEO is making about as much as a principal Google engineer: no, I don't see the issue. Even if he made $0 the issue remains given that every part of the server operation costs more than him.

But sure. What do you think is a fair salary or totalccomp for a founder and CEO of a popular, privacy focused app?

Post reply on HN