Problems we are having with #Signal:
* It is and will remain centralized (clear strategy of *not* federating servers)
* It requires strong identifiers/selectors (phone#) to use
* Author disallows distribution by anyone but Google, although free/libre
* It keeps pushing away verification of fingerprint in interface
* It relies on Google+Amazon infrastructure
* Its funding is shady (OTF = Radio Free Asia = USG)

= clearly unethical choices, unjustifiable by accessibility or technological reasons.


The Better options all require advanced skills to use. Non-technical users deserve privacy too.

* Non-federation means users not giving up at server selector dialog and no one-off hostile servers.

* Phone numbers are mediocre IDs but hard for users to screw up.

* Google prevents third parties (e.g. abusive ex, corrupt local sherrif) from tampering with the apk.

* Funding is funding; the USG funds lots of stuff, some of it good.

Signal is imperfect but the perfect is the enemy of the good.

@suetanvil I wish we stop attempting at justifying the ethically/morally unacceptable by "usability". this notion considers that "users" (not people eh!) are all idiots, incapable of doing what the person mentioning it is capable of.

It is by infantilizing people that they end up being subjugated, under control.

My own field experience of sec is that when u make people understand (activists, journalists doing real journalism, sources, etc.) they are capable of making efforts (tails, GPG, etc.)


Would you get my mother to use something harder than signal?

I tried to make her use it but she said some of her contacts did not receive messages.

I mean she did not really care about privacy or crypting messages. So she went back to her standard app after switching phone.

Standards users will not make the effort to understand something more difficult than what Google teaches them.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

Discussions adultes, otaku et geek, avec des gens sympa