Hacker News Reader

Comment by paxy | Hacker News Reader

Worth noting that the other founder, Brian Acton, already left Facebook last September (and in fact tweeted #DeleteFacebook recently), so it is pretty obvious that the relationship between the two groups has been less than perfect.

I'm pretty certain that they didn't want to sell WhatsApp in the first place, and knew the privacy risks that having Facebook as an owner would bring...but of course $19 billion is enough to settle a lot of issues.

I personally consider WhatsApp to have the same level of security/privacy as Messenger. If you need E2E encrypted messaging use Signal instead.

View on HN

With that money, a new messenger can be created, preferably one that uses an open E2E-encrypted protocol that supports decentralization.

which seems precisely why Acton donated $50 million to the Signal Foundation and is taking an active role in a parallel for-profit entity.

Why not just use Signal? Didn't moxie implement the e2e in whatsapp anyways?

While Signal is a good start, you do lose the advantage WhatsApp: its entrenched market dominance and network effect.

Market dominance and network effects come and go.

Network effects with messaging are weaker.

If you convince just one of your friends to hop onto signal, it can be useful - make it someone you message a lot and go from there. A few months ago I had just one person I used it for. Now it’s in double figures and growing.

Every hacker who gives a damn should install signal and encourage others to use it. There’s just no downside.

You don't even need to convince one of your friends initially - just use it as a regular SMS texting app. That's how I started, and now I'd guess about one third of my friends have Signal. (Though I guess it helps that I don't use WhatsApp either.)

I'm not sure why this is downvoted. While yes, network effects come and go, currently WhatsApp has a market dominance. I tell people I use Signal, WhatsApp, and Text, but prefer Signal, and most people either use WhatsApp or Text. It is hard to get people to switch. That is the reason Facebook is so dominant, even though it is common for people to dislike a lot of it.

My main problem with Signal (and similar apps like Wire) is syncing messages across devices. I'd often find myself turning on my home computer after work and having to wait a while for the desktop app to finally finish syncing with my phone and allowing me to chat. Call me spoiled but after experiencing that every night it started to grate on me.

WhatsApp uses the Signal protocol, but somehow managed to make this work with WhatsApp Web, so the limitation isn't inherent to the technology.

The last time I had looked into it, somebody on the Signal github suggested otherwise. I hope you're right but either way that doesn't change the fact that this problem is still present today.

WhatsApp web does key exchange over QR code, which is a fascinating choice.

Doesn't this apply to 100% of communication apps (IRC, chat, email, social media)? What's the alternative?

Wire takes a few seconds to sync messages to a powered on device, same as an email client.

I'm glad it's working well you but neither Signal nor Wire took acceptable amounts of time to sync my messages versus every other networked app I use.

Do you have a github issue link for Signal or Wire?

xmpp seems to have good syncing

How does Signal plan to be long term financially viable? If they can't find a model that works why won't they go the way of whatsapp or the dodo?

They could get some inspiration from Mozilla for example.

WikiMedia more than Mozilla. Most of Mozilla's revenue comes from search/advertising deals struck with Google and others. WikiMedia relies on donations alone.

The worlds most powerful collection of data is run without a business model.

They ask for help once a year, and help is given. Signal could operate very similarly to Wikipedia.

It's a non-profit, running off of donations. https://freedom.press/crowdfunding/signal/

Yep.

It’s already a model, and it already works. There are no VCs, there is no exit.

Eh. Like Tox?

All this "secure" messengers forget about rubber hose decryption that is used in majority of the world.

The thing about rubber hose cryptoanalysis is that it doesn't scale. Even the most depraved of governments will have to purposefully and deliberately choose their victims rather than vacuum and process all data they have access to.

Luckly, rubber hose cryptoanalysis is not a concern for most people, which is where crypto is needed the most.

To clarify:

Any centralized messaging can not be secure by definition.

Also:

A lot of people are forgetting what a lot of NSA types can do with metadata.

(IIRC Italians caught CIA spies with phone number metadata analysis software supplied by... US!)

Any messaging app that is associated with a phone number calling itself "secure" is just maliciously stupid.

I'm really curious why they thought this would go differently than any of the other companies that Facebook acquired…or did they just think that they could stick with WhatsApp for as long as they agreed with Facebook, and then take the billions they earned and try to use it in a way that aligned with their principles and end up having more benefit for society?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com