Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cryptocurrency

Re:Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cry... by glsdfgkjsklfj on Tuesday April 06, 2021 @08:17PM (#26719014)

> goes against easy to use

or just respect reasonable limits?

Does it make sense to destroy one feature for the illusion of having both?

Elements.io and telegram (to a much lesser extent) are safes. You place something there and it is locked. Signal, whatsapp, et al promise to be safes, but as soon as you place something, a hidden camera scan all the documents and print copies in a hidden printer at your home safe.

Would you trust that safe? would you still even call them safes? Yet some product manager/marketer convinced you that these are essential features for a "easy of use safe".

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cry... by lxgr on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @03:45AM (#26721568)

How is Telegram a ”safe“ but Signal isn‘t? This doesn’t make sense.

Telegram stores all history (except secret chats, which are a pain to use) server-side and effectively unencrypted.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cry... by dunefox on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @09:03AM (#26724267)

Matrix is an industrial-strength steel safe. Telegram is one of those transparent plastic safes you can buy for 20€.

[ Parent | on HN ]