• Kalcifer@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    I don’t trust Signal. Haven’t used it since it went down when people and capitol rioters fled WhatsApp and signed up. My understanding is it’s a brittle centralized system just like WhatsApp.

    Imo, there are more components to trust than service reliability (iiuc) — eg: trust in the underlying protocol, trust in the governing body etc.

      • Kalcifer@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        Is that an “agree” as in you hadn’t considered what I said, or that you agree to that in addition? If it was the latter, I should clarify that I wasn’t adding supplementary information — I was outlining what I thought was a flaw in your rationale (eg argument from ignorance) for distrust in Signal.

        • ctag@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          It’s an agree as in I don’t really feel like arguing with another user here. I don’t buy the point about metadata when Signal, a centralized service like Discord (why are we talking about Discord?), may be able to scrape it too. Or the point about anonymity when Signal is far from the right tool for that purpose too, see above “spams your contact list.”

          For reliability, I’m not concerned with how much RAM Signal’s servers have. What I should have highlighted is that Signal can nuke your communications on accident / on purpose / under coercion. And it’s proven because they’ve already done it before. Mitigate that by having a backup system set up? That necessarily doubles your surface area for breaks in privacy or whatever a given user is worried about. So starting with Signal in the first place doesn’t make sense to me.