←back to thread

Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cryptocurrency

(www.wired.com)
544 points josh2600 | 9 comments | 06 Apr 21 16:23 UTC | HN request time: 0.95s | source | bottom
Show context
meowfly ◴[06 Apr 21 21:24 UTC] No.26717573[source]▶
The comment from the article echos my own sentiments:

> Speaking solely as a person who is really into encrypted messaging, it terrifies me that they're going to take this really clean story of an encrypted messenger and mix it up with the nightmare of laws and regulations and vulnerability that is cryptocurrency.

Moreover, there are three other points I'd add:

1. I don't like "do everything" apps like WeChat or Line. One of Signals strengths was UX that focused on it's core competency. Early in Signal's development they would add privacy features. Lately they have been adding social features. This, however, feels especially out of left field and likely to hurt the UX.

2. This smells like dev resources will be spent building and maintaining something not related to messaging.

3. I've always had a "don't let perfect be the enemy of good" rationalization that gives Signal autonomy to grow a privacy centric messaging app despite the deficits (e.g lack of federation). In contrast, I personally associate "crypto" with "scam". There have been so many shady ICOs and pump-dump schemes around crypto. This will taint the product for those of us who don't think of crypto currency as being anything more than pump-and-dump schemes and a way to buy dab rigs online.

replies(16): >>26717639 #>>26717735 #>>26717739 #>>26717937 #>>26719072 #>>26719095 #>>26719299 #>>26719963 #>>26720322 #>>26720564 #>>26720761 #>>26720886 #>>26721182 #>>26721555 #>>26721814 #>>26726903 #
1. takenpilot ◴[06 Apr 21 21:42 UTC] No.26717735[source]▶
In a lot of ways, the transfer of cryptocurrency is the same as the transfer of generic messages.

It's only when you're transferring them back to dollars/yuan/yen/etc. that it's suddenly currency from a government.

replies(5): >>26717950 #>>26718260 #>>26718561 #>>26718580 #>>26721426 #
2. guerrilla ◴[06 Apr 21 22:05 UTC] No.26717950[source]▶
I'll tell you one way it's not, is as soon as someone commits a crime who happens to use Signal and the media gets ahold of this. It'll be a circus with terms like "dark webv and wha not thrown arohnd. GPs point #3 is kind of important for their reputation and if we want to onboard more people into crypto messaging.
3. gsich ◴[06 Apr 21 22:37 UTC] No.26718260[source]▶
So how do I get the cryptocurrency in the first place? Especially Mobilecoin?
4. JumpCrisscross ◴[06 Apr 21 23:18 UTC] No.26718561[source]▶
> the transfer of cryptocurrency is the same as the transfer of generic messages

Technically, yes. Legally and sociopolitically, no.

And if you intentionally muddle the data streams, that brings the full force of anti-money laundering, tax evasion and terrorist financing law against you. It gives almost any government a free pass to do what it wants.

Freedom to speak privately is, in most democracies, popularly recognised as a right. Freedom to pay using dark money is not. Attaching the second to the first weakens both.

replies(2): >>26720650 #>>26726967 #
5. amelius ◴[06 Apr 21 23:21 UTC] No.26718580[source]▶
You mean in the sense that it can be traced back to the originator, just like messages?
6. dannyw ◴[07 Apr 21 04:37 UTC] No.26720650[source]▶
Legally, yes. FinCEN distinguishes custodial exchanges with noncustodial wallets. It looks like signal is doing the latter.

Bitcoin Core (the software) is not registered as a money transmitter anywhere in the world, its developers are fine and never got into any trouble.

replies(1): >>26720661 #
7. JumpCrisscross ◴[07 Apr 21 04:39 UTC] No.26720661{3}[source]▶
> FinCEN distinguishes custodial exchanges with noncustodial wallets. It looks like signal is doing the latter.

We agree. There is a legal difference between a custodial exchange and noncustodial wallet. Just as there is a difference between a non-money messaging system and a noncustodial wallet. The comment you are responding to concerned itself with the latter.

8. fauigerzigerk ◴[07 Apr 21 07:23 UTC] No.26721426[source]▶
Transferring cryptocurrency between different people (with the exception of spouses) is an asset disposal that is subject to capital gains tax in the UK. It doesn't matter what, if anything, you get in return.
9. jdroe1211 ◴[07 Apr 21 16:10 UTC] No.26726967[source]▶
Simply enough, people do NOT want filthy hooker money in their wallets, if they don't need to. Yuck.