What's the redpill on this?
>>109828154jeetware for poopjeetsavoid at all costs. you should literally PAY to NOT use it. go to the casino and lose your money in a slot machine instead of thinking about signal
>>109828154||>|&
>>109828173This is what I've always thought, instinctively, being that it's corporate. But what is concretely wrong with it? I get that it definitely smells like the goyim privacy app but whenever I research it I'm BTFO'd.For example I think they require your cell # upon sign up, which is obviously retarded for a privacy app. I'm just trying to prove to myself that Matrix Protocol is better.
>>109828182what?
>>109828241>Matrix ProtocolLiterally created by a group of israelis
It's the best balance of privacy and being able to get your friends and family to use it if you just discuss normal things with your friends and family.If your idea of privacy is "I do not want my personal messages scraped for advertising data", Signal easily meets that. If your idea of privacy is "I am a political dissident and the fact I even exist can't be known by any government body" it doesn't. Most people are in the first camp.It leaks some information: the fact you have an account, and when you send messages, and their rough size (not exact, it pads). For most people, the fact they exist and send messages is not a problematic data leak.Matrix is better in some ways, but the resource usage is pretty intense for servers for, frankly, overly purist reasons around federation of room state. They've also moved away from Dendrite, which is a shame.
>>109828271Oh and one last thing on Signal. If you do use it, use the Molly fork. It removes the Play Services dependency.
>>109828154the money for the shilling campaign run out, so you don't hear about it anymore
>>109828271signal uses google notifications, so yes, you get scraped >but but you could tinker with it and not do thatbut your friend doesn't tinker, so you end up with your data in Google anyway
>>109828284>>109828271>>109828273woah, actual fair info instead of memeing. Thanks.
its okay I use it to talk to my friends, I'm not a target individual aka schizophrenic however. it does the job
>>109828360>>109828273graphs with green-good red-bad are never fair info, like the very first row is "is it recommended", lolImagine starting your info graph with:>Do i want you to use it? Yes
i am not a targeted individual, so i just use WhatsApp, which uses the exact same encryption as Signal
>>109828371it's a tldr, see "Overview"
>>109828271it's just shocking there's not something approachable that respects your privacy and data to the extent that your aunt and a dissident of the state as you say could both use it.it doesn't seem like it's that hard of a problem to solve. Matrix yeah I can see that being harder with a discord like structure with rooms and whatnot. But AFAIK can't you use IRC pretty privately? tor + irc is pretty good.. obviously modern society has incentives aligned opposite of not harvesting data but still you'd think there'd be at least one cock.li style schizo out there doing something about it.how hard is it to send packets over the internet with encryption? I just don't get why it's seemingly impossible and has been a stalemate for the last few decades.
>>109828356Use Molly. No need to tinker. It is exactly the same UX as Signal.>>109828360I have this insane delusion that 4chan could be good, so I try to make not-shit posts to move towards that.Pass it on.
>>109828428the major problem is how to trust the keys that other participants send you, especially if you have no out of band way to verify.
>>109828452How does something like GnuPGP do it? Also, do you at all remember Tox? It only worked if both parties were online at the time But why is p2p messaging special cased and weird whereas in general traffic is encrypted and it's not a problem?
>>109828378>which uses the exact same encryption as Signalprove it
>>109828439>I have this insane delusion that 4chan could be good, so I try to make not-shit posts to move towards that.I respect your hustle but we need to move platforms..
>>109828428It's not terribly hard, but once you have to start tying into infrastructure and scaling up it starts to get really hard to keep things a secret. This difficulty can come from technical reasons if you have a poor design, but money is what actually makes things difficult. Infrastructure is expensive, and money always comes with strings attached. Even if you keep everything secure, you'll have to combat well-funded adversaries who want access to secrets. It's an uphill battle.Either way signal is good enough right now if you follow some standard opsec practices.
>>109828470>How does something like GnuPGP do it?You can either exchange the key out of band (via some other method of transmission that you "trust", in-person being ideal) or you use a key server where you publish it and other people can look it up based on your email address. But then again, how do you know the person's email address is really them?The only system I like that does this is tor hidden services, where the identity and the public key are the same thing. It doesn't pretend to be something it isn't.
52 462 632 0747
>>109828479this has been a good thread so far. 4chan has a dialogue model that's unique in that rather having infinitely nesting trees like HN, Reddit or Twitter you can actually tag posts and reply to anything you want in the same post. I don't know of any other major site that has anything but nested trees, and I hate nested tree format.And the lack of up or down votes but allowing sage is cool. like being able to mute interaction bennies but still mouth off on them. It is definitely dying there though and the culture has supplanted by X or otherwise made largely mainstream like popular use of incel, redpill, anti-semitism, etc. >>109828495What are signals strings attached? And Matrix doesn't really have the same issue by being federated, right? This gets at the heart of my intuitive leaning for Matrix. >Either way signal is good enough right now if you follow some standard opsec practices.Good enough for what?>>109828501I'm OK with trusting the address or point of contact they gave me, and provided communication from their address to mine is encrypted and bullet proof, I'm OK with trusting what I'd receive from them.Like if my address is bob@email.com, and some chicks is alice@email.com, and she gave me her address in person I will trust the keys she sends me. I can't blame the protocol for Alice being a whore. > in-person being idealok yeah exactly So the problem lies in communicating with non-trusted addresses? Can you even blame a protocol for that? >the identity and the public key are the same thingYeah that seems very intuitive and safe, surprised if that's not standard. I would expect almost that one's address would be their public key which is I guess the same thing. tor has the problem of extremely slow performance though and also requires sufficient non-fed users to keep the node rely from being unable to be inferred
>>109828501>>109828495Can you guys clarify what the technologic problem really is then as distinct from the social network problem? Like you can have site A where it's like old school social media and everyone knows everyone IRL, but then there's site B where you're dealign with merchants or foreign parties you dont' actually know and can't reasonably offload that trust assumption to the user CAn't you just have two different protocols for confirmed trusted parties vs randoms?
>>109828154There's no need for a redpill. It's centralized and requires a phone to sign up. You want to use that on a privacy-focused application?>>109828270If you don't like Matrix, there's always Simplex.
>>109828536>There's no need for a redpill. It's centralized and requires a phone to sign up. You want to use that on a privacy-focused application?but this is exactly why I was asking for a redpill. the servers are open source, idk that the databases are, but they could for example discard the number after 2FA is complete. I remember reading about their decision to do this awhile ago.I don't have a phone so I don't use it, but once I actually read about it seemed solid and their reasons for centralizing made sense. But my jewdar was going off there, bigly.
>>109828271This.>>109828360>>109828284You don't need molly, you can download signal apk direct from browser without google play dependency.
One of the reasons I was asking is because I want to "get a community going" (in quotes cuz it's gay) of people who archive and pay for different sources, and facilitate trade between them, but such a communication source would violate licensing.For example I regularly pay for Databento OPRA, I'd trade for CME futures data if I knew the transmission and communication protocol wouldn't put me in jail.
>>109828154>redpill on thisdon't use it /thread
>>109828522>So the problem lies in communicating with non-trusted addresses? Can you even blame a protocol for that?no, but that's the answer to your question anyway.Tor is one of the best we have at obscuring the origin IP address, which is a different problem from simply keeping things private.
>>109828182I see it. Do you see this?>>109828173
>>109828154Something to do with cell phones which nobody in their right mind would use for anything sensitive.
>>109828687can u explain
>>109828915my dad was a Johnny bravo clone my grandma said once >if there was an illegal way to do something, he'd do it
>>109828547>the servers are open sourceAnd they're also centralized. Which means you have one choice of a server provider. How do you know that your server provider is running the open source code they showed you?
