Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> As we continue to build Signal to be an alternative to the surveillance tech that dominates most of our digital communication, we will remain attuned to the different ways that people want to connect and build ways for them to do so without compromising on their own privacy, wherever they are.

You require a phone number for your service to be used. That is a clear compromise on privacy, and you have no intention of changing it. Spammers can easily use my number to send me garbage. (Edit: you also require that users have Google Play or the App Store.)

You are anti-diverse since you are hostile to desktop users. Also, you are pro-harassment (Edit: people here think harassment requires intimidation) because you teach people that no doesn't mean no; I say no to donating and you keep asking me.



It's a compromise on anonymity, not privacy. But I agree with it, it's a compromise on anonymity because it avoids having to use another identifier and another social graph.

My entire extended family uses Signal, and I didn't even onboard them, my 69 year old mother (a retired special education teacher) did, because it uses your existing contact list to message people. I didn't need to walk people through account creation, we didn't need to exchange usernames. Even my 92 year old grandfather was able to get Signal to work. He's not great at typing on a smartphone, but he's figured out video calling, opening pictures, and voice memos.

I think that's a decent audience to shoot for.


Supporting phone numbers is a different question than supporting only phone numbers.


> You are anti-diverse since you are hostile to desktop users.

Huh? Signal desktop has all the features of the phone, as far as I can tell.

Very strange definition of diversity!

> Also, you are pro-harassment because you teach people that no doesn't mean no; I say no to donating and you keep asking me.

If this is what you call harassment, count yourself lucky in life. :)


No it doesn't. You can't export/backup on desktop, for example. I'd like to back up signal database to the SD card on my phone, because I don't have enough space to d it on the internal storage, but the app won't let you choose where your backup goes. So if you have a large message database that takes up more than half your built-in storage, you're SOL.


[flagged]


Can you please not post in the flamewar style to HN? You've unfortunately been doing that more than once recently. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html


Sorry. I'll try to avoid rhetorical questions.


> Are you trying to normalise harassment?

Harassment is defined as "aggressive pressure or intimidation." Can you help everyone here understand how occasional requests for donation for a free service you voluntarily use constitute harassment?


It's not harassment, but they're constantly begging for donations (as in, every 1-2 days) even though they have a >$40 million cushion.


Since when does harassment require intimidation? Maybe it's a regional thing. Anyway, the basic principle is respecting someone's refusal of something. Signal can harp on about how good they are, but they are far worse than even WhatsApp in this respect.

You might think dark patterns are okay when they're in a free app, however they're still dark patterns.


From what I recall, the donation prompt says "not now" to dismiss, in which case you're consenting to being reminded later by picking that option.

If you wish to never see the prompt again, you would have to uninstall the application altogether as no "do not remind me again" option exists, which makes perfect sense considering they're a free service.

I say "from what I recall" because I chose to donate. But back to the point: considering you consented to be reminded later by keeping the app installed and choosing "not now," where's the consent violation? (the term you're looking for specifically, since harassment is not the correct word choice)


You're correct. There is no consent violation. Signal is just nagware.


> and you have no intention of changing it.

https://signal.org/blog/building-faster-oram/

> It lays the groundwork for the introduction of usernames and phone number privacy which will offer new privacy controls around your phone number’s visibility on Signal.

and

> Usernames have been one of the most requested features throughout Signal’s existence. Making usernames and phone number privacy a reality in Signal is a massive technical undertaking. It’s something we’ve been working on for a long time and will continue to work on for several more months or longer before it’s ready.


I wish I could get one without my phone number, but it is a way to control spamming and limit people to one signal, and to find each other. But I don't think they are anti-diverse, that is an extreme over-reach. They have desktop signal for all 3 major desktops and it works just fine by all reports. The only thing they don't have is the ability to have it on 2 phones at one time. If you think signal is pro-harassment then the entire world is pro-harassment by your standard, that's a very silly claim.


> (Edit: you also require that users have Google Play or the App Store.)

This is incorrect. You don't need Google Play to use Signal on Android. You can download the APK from https://signal.org/android/apk/

Then verify with SHA256 and you're golden.


And to pre-empt the followup misinfo: you can also use that without Google Play Services. I do.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: