161–170 of 226 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why? If someone wants to use a phone number for their identifier, fine. But make it optional. If I join Signal with another alias (free-form string perhaps) then they could just add me via that. Not really harder than using my phone number.
And insane spam follows.
I'd argue that $5/month is quite high. Not because Signal isn't useful, but because the actual incurred cost per user is much, much lower. Of course, not everyone is going to pay. But if Signal were to ask users to pay, say $10 per year , i'm sure there'd be a lot more payers.
I agree. I love using signal and have converted most of my friends to it, but $60/year is too high for me for a chat app. I’d pay a dollar a month, maybe two.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For what it is and how it contributes to me daily I don't believe it's high. $5/month for the peace of mind Signal provides is something I can make a case for. I subscribe to the $10/month level - because everyone in my circle uses it, and I pushed many of them in that direction. I want it to succeed, I want it to continue to improve, I want it to be available. I know I spend more than $10/month on other things that…
How did you get your friends to switch? I have tried and, dude, my group will just not change from their pre-installed messaging apps, except for 2 of them. They don't care that it's more secure (arguably) or that you can pull it up on your computer (my main reason for using it), they just have no interest.
Friends and colleagues are a different tact. I work in a space where Signal makes sense for what I do, people already get it. There are people I work with that I've incented to start using it based on Signal groups they couldn't participate in otherwise. That worked well, but bootstrapping that is the hurdle. Some didn't know what Signal was and didn't question it at all when I suggested it (probably not the best approach). Looking at my Signal "Insights" for the week and I'm at 97% encrypted messaging. The 3% is service messages being delivered via SMS and one person I've texted that I've only recently started interacting with. I've used the "I need to send you this securely" a few times, which has also worked well. In those cases, since the barrier to entry is just installing, it's rarely been met with resistance.
I'm not sure these help. I'd like to think I've trickled Signal out to hundreds of people over the years. Keep in mind when I started with this it was RedPhone/TextSecure, so it's been years. Consistency is a helpful driver.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wish so bad that the signal crypto integration would have been done better. They could have implemented a wallet and generated revenue in the hundreds of millions like metamask does. Starting a new blockchain obviously has founder incentives which are great but it only makes sense when people feel like your contributing to the diversity of blockchains not simply copy pasting monero.
MobileCoin has a lot going for it over Monero. Lower fees (around 1¢) and instant.
>A year ago, Platformer was the first to report that Signal was considering adding cryptocurrency payments to the platform, and it started with MobileCoin. Signal CEO Moxie Marlinspike has served as an adviser to the MobileCoin cryptocurrency, which is built on the Stellar blockchain and is designed to make payments as anonymous as cash.
If you're interested in monero in singal check this project https://ccs.getmonero.org/proposals/vd-molly-payments-stage1...
[1] We want payments in Signal to be fast, private, and work well on mobile devices. The first payments protocol we’ve added support for is a privacy focused payments network called MobileCoin, which has its own currency, MOB. https://signal.org/blog/help-us-test-payments-in-signal/
[2] https://messari.io/asset/mobilecoin/profile/launch-and-initi...
[3] https://www.theverge.com/22872133/signal-cryptocurrency-paym...
I'd argue that $5/month is quite high. Not because Signal isn't useful, but because the actual incurred cost per user is much, much lower. Of course, not everyone is going to pay. But if Signal were to ask users to pay, say $10 per year , i'm sure there'd be a lot more payers.
It depends on who you are targeting. For users willing to donate at all, the difference between (say) $2 and $5 might not be that much. Asking for more might therefore actually maximize the return. All other users probably wouldn't donate regardless of whether it's $1 or less, so why bother considering them in your model. (edit) Offering an $1 option would just get you 0 of these users, and possibly lower the returns…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How did you get your friends to switch? I have tried and, dude, my group will just not change from their pre-installed messaging apps, except for 2 of them. They don't care that it's more secure (arguably) or that you can pull it up on your computer (my main reason for using it), they just have no interest.
I had some luck with a subset of friends but not all of them. A big group is still on Hangouts or whatever Google calls it now. My advice is you target 2 close friends and propose to try it out for a week. If you win them over then you can start working on more. Software advocacy isn't easy by any means. Most people want to not shake the boat of their current habits especially since it will take effort and time to ge…
They should sell the ability of creating an account not attached to a phone number. Pay $5, get a code that allows creating a single account, enter the code somewhere in the app to allow using a user name in place of the phone. This limits spam and, as this code can also be sent to another person, there is a way to hide the relationship between payer and final user. No need for cryptocoins, NFTs, or other stupid thin…
Requiring a phone number is literally my only complaint about Signal, I used to just use a Google Voice number but then I learned about TextNow and have been migrating away from Google as much as possible https://www.textnow.com/how-it-works
I am fundamentally not interested in managing monthly bills for things. You won’t win me by asking for recurring donations. Just ask me for ten bucks for some one-time symbolic upgrade. Also I’ve recently been back on the App Store for the first time in a long while. WHAT IS GOING ON?! The gall for simple, offline only apps like a little piano keyboard to want monthly fees for continued use. There isn’t even an illus…
https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/4408365318426-S...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For what it is and how it contributes to me daily I don't believe it's high. $5/month for the peace of mind Signal provides is something I can make a case for. I subscribe to the $10/month level - because everyone in my circle uses it, and I pushed many of them in that direction. I want it to succeed, I want it to continue to improve, I want it to be available. I know I spend more than $10/month on other things that…
I get your argument but remember a lot of users aren't in the united states. In India, Amazon prime is around $1.5/ month. Same $2.5 for Netflix mobile only basic plan. My point is, $5/month might sound reasonable for most folk in the us but outside that, with purchasing power greatly reduced to a factor of 1:80 for example with India and USA conversion rate, these sound very expensive. So my question is, should I pa…
> In India, Amazon prime is around $1.5/ month. Same $2.5 for Netflix mobile only basic plan.
> My point is, $5/month might sound reasonable for most folk in the us but outside that, with purchasing power greatly reduced to a factor of 1:80 for example with India and USA conversion rate, these sound very expensive.
They have a currency selector. If you pick Indian rupees, the the base level is 200 rupees a month (which Google says is $2.68).