←back to thread

Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cryptocurrency

(www.wired.com)
544 points josh2600 | 2 comments | 06 Apr 21 16:23 UTC | HN request time: 2.218s | source
Show context
cdogl ◴[06 Apr 21 23:13 UTC] No.26718524[source]▶
Long-time Signal user here, with a number of technical and non-technical friends, colleagues and acquaintances who also use it. I don't know who was asking for this. And I think it really dilutes Signal's message.

I believe that everyone has a fundamental right to secure, private communication. Some people may hold the same belief for the right to transfer funds. I don't agree and I suspect many others feel the same. That tension alone makes this look like a bad decision to me.

replies(7): >>26718703 #>>26718805 #>>26719043 #>>26719103 #>>26719202 #>>26720779 #>>26726663 #
JeremyNT ◴[07 Apr 21 00:21 UTC] No.26719043[source]▶
This kind of anti-feature is not what I signed up for. I just wanted a secure messenger normal users could understand! It seems like a simple enough problem that Signal solved well (apart from the phone number requirement).

Sadly, now it feels like Signal was just a long game trojan for Marlinspike to onboard users to a cryptocurrency pyramid scheme. This has nothing to do with its core functionality and it makes me question the developers' motives.

I've wasted my influence with my non-technical friends convincing them to adopt Signal, and I don't forsee convincing them to switch yet again to something different.

The state of secure messaging is really bleak. I wish Matrix had an IM-style client that was decent enough for non-technical users to adopt.

replies(4): >>26719195 #>>26719289 #>>26720457 #>>26720662 #
1. leppr ◴[07 Apr 21 00:51 UTC] No.26719289[source]▶
How does the ability to transfer "points" from one number to another, remove from the messaging features?

Is it really that hard to imagine unobtrusive UI that makes this as optional as sending GIFs, stickers or location data? Or did the later features already kill Signal for you?

replies(1): >>26719824 #
2. cdogl ◴[07 Apr 21 02:11 UTC] No.26719824[source]▶
Signal's UX still needs work and a lot of features just don't work very well (e.g. the desktop sync). That's fine in and of itself - the team is small and they're funded by donations - but if they're spending time on payments, that raises concerns for me about the priorities of the project and how the funding is being spent.