Super sad that they didn't choose Monero.
Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cryptocurrency
131–140 of 665 posts
Re: Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cryptocurrency
#132Is your backend open source, or not? Haven’t seen the git updated in a while.
Last commit 5 days ago: https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server
Re: Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cryptocurrency
#133Super sad that they didn't choose Monero.
It is. Monero community seems to have made so many choices that prove it is dedicated to the "digital cash" use case (dynamic block sizes, constant tail emission, etc).
Re: Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cryptocurrency
#134The UK already has faster payments in all major banks. I can send and receive money instantly from app or Web. Will yours be as fast as that? The UK has a problem with authorised push payment fraud. Banks can recover funds which have been sent as a result of phishing / fraud. How can I reverse a payment on your platform if it was fraudulent? The UK also has receiver verification. If I try to send to an account and it…
> Most banks let the user block receiving payments from specific accounts. How do you stop harassers sending unwanted money?
First time I read about that, how does this work in practice? A person regularly sends you small amounts such that all you see is their name whenever you log into your bank account?
Re: Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cryptocurrency
#135Earlier quoted context omitted.
How does Stellar Consensus prevent double-spends? Imagine I have a private key to an address with 10 coins. Imagine I spend the same amount of money (10 coins) on Mars and Earth at the same time. There is a 10-lightminute gap between Mars and Earth. Assume Mars and Earth have a similar number of Stellar nodes. What happens in Stellar Consensus?
Stellar actually does nothing to prevent double-spends as it is the consensus layer and not the ledger. The ledger prevents double spends in mobilecoin by using a proof called a "key image" which is part of CryptoNote ( https://bytecoin.org/old/whitepaper.pdf ). Essentially, a ring signature is produced by the user which says "one of these N transactions belong to me" and the key image proves that one of the members…
I don't understand the "key image" cryptography, but I can't fathom how any cryptography, no matter how smart it is, could prevent the user from:
1) Creating a backup of their wallet on disk.
2) Sending their coins somewhere, but not broadcasting the transaction to the network, instead storing it in a file.
3) Restoring from the backup
4) Sending the coins to a different address = double spending them.
5) Broadcasting the transactions in a very close timespan to conduct the double-spend.
The network needs to prevent this by storing, in an non-forge-able fashion such as PoW, which transaction happened first.
How does your system guarantee that?
Re: Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cryptocurrency
#136Why not use GNU Taler, if you insist on integrating a irrelevant payment mechanism?
GNU Taler would have been far _more_ relevant because it is a generic payment processing service and not tied to any specific coin.
Re: Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cryptocurrency
#137Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unsurprisingly money is still needed to pay for development and hosting costs, and Brian Acton's loan won't last forever.
This explicitly doesn't monetize Signal so this line of argument isn't particularly relevant.
There seems to be a very large amount of outstanding coin that the founders just happen to control...
Re: Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cryptocurrency
#138Super sad that they didn't choose Monero.
That was my first thought as well. Why didn't they pick Monero? I don't see how any other coin could be better.
Re: Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cryptocurrency
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
If they didn't use some random 'coin' no one has heard of I'd be on board. They're trying to compete in a bad way. They should simply just use Stripe and be done with it. People want an alternative to facebook messaging and PayPal. They don't want superfluous cryptos.
I think the end-goal is to provide privacy guarantees you will never have with Stripe or other traditional payment processors.
You can't trust an app that is distributed through the Google Play Store as a wallet with any kind of privacy guarantee.
Re: Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cryptocurrency
#140Is your backend open source, or not? Haven’t seen the git updated in a while.
Last commit 5 days ago: https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server
This is either the mandela effect (I know for a fact that the server was stuck on "April 2020" for at least 6 months), or Signal intentionally hid development and then revealed it all when they realized it was bad PR.