this post was submitted on 04 Sep 2025
278 points (98.3% liked)
Technology
74799 readers
2700 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
signal has stories now, so I'd say yes
Bah, more reason to avoid Signal. For private communications I want an antisocial network, not the opposite.
It's completely removable with one setting. No nags or anti-patterns or design holes.
If it stops a few from sticking with whatsapp because signal lacks that "feature", I'd say it's worth it.
I think it's a silly feature for a messaging app, but it has no impact on me if I ignore the feature.
I just use that for sharing memes with whoever sees it.
It does say something about the mindset of the vendor, which is a legit reason to decide not to use an app. From what I can tell, Teslas are pretty good cars despite some issues here and there. But Elon's antics are enough to make me decide not to buy one.
I'm not sure adding a questionable social feature to a messaging app is reasonably comparable to the very long list of insane and/or evil shit Musk has done.
Like any messaging system, Signal's utility is proportional to its userbase. If stories get more people to use it without making it worse for people who don't care, then they're a good idea even if I think everything else about the concept is bad.
A bar (place where you drink) is another type of a messaging system. You can meet people in them and have conversations there. That doesn't mean it's best to crowd everyone into one giant bar claiming that increases utility, compared with letting people freely open their own bars. Especially if the avowed purpose of the bar is enabling private conversations (giving you and your friend Bob a private place to talk, as opposed to creating a meeting place for strangers).
I can understand visiting a giant bar if I want to mingle with randos in public. If I want to talk privately with my friend, I want a small, private bar, preferably one whose existence is not known to anyone outside of my friend group. If the giant bar operator is going out of his way to prevent me from doing that, I have to say he is up to something not so good.
Sorry about the strained analogy but at least it didn't mention cars. Well, until just now.
The analogy between a private messaging service and a bar is not just strained; it's nonsensical.
It might work for a chat system that's mainly public and discoverable like Matrix, IRC, or Discord. A community having too many people, or any people who don't follow certain norms can make it unpleasant. As long as it keeps out spammers, Signal having people I don't want to talk to on it won't affect me at all; I just won't give those people my phone number or username.
You can turn the feature off entirely, or just not talk to people who post them? It's not something like tiktok where you get pushed a bunch of random videos, it's stuff that people you know are sending you.
Use whatever software you want, more power to you, but I'm not totally convinced that "chaired by a fascist transphobic multibillionaire oligarch who actively subverts democracy at every opportunity" and "introduced a feature I don't want to use into my free secure messaging app" are even close to equivocal?
I'm bothered mostly by the default Signal app's inability to use a self-hosted server instead of signal.com's own server. I've been skeptical towards Signal because of that. The social media feature is something I hadn't heard of til just now. It reinforces my skepticism but it's just another issue. Both tell me that Signal is out to somehow monetize (and maybe spy on) other people's private relationships in a captive userbase, sort of like, you know, Marc Zuckerberg. I'd prefer to avoid dealing with people like that, especially where privacy apps are concerned.
I'd be more interested in Signal if I could use my own server without having to get people to install modified clients.
I don't like the centralized nature of it either, but until someone makes a decentralized option that's polished and reliable enough that nobody will be mad at me after I talk them into using it, Signal will be my go-to for messaging.
Ideologically, I'd like it to be Matrix. I use Matrix on occasion, at least when Element web isn't taking up 10% of my laptop's RAM, ElementX isn't crashing on load, and whatever native desktop client I tried last is actually performing key exchange so I can read my private messages. I would not try to talk someone into trying Matrix right now unless they were ideologically motivated or interested in the technology.
In fact that option already exists, it's Signal itself, except that they deliberately made it harder to use that way. The client and server code are (from what I understand) both downloadable. So you can run your own server, modify the client to connect to your server instead of to Signal's, compile the new client, and get your friends to use your new .apk instead of using the one from the Play store. Of course Signal could perfectly well have just made the server address a user configuration field in the first place, like Nextcloud does.
So why didn't they? The existence of the social media feature tells something about their intentions. The fact that you can decide not to use that feature is irrelevant to what it tells. The idea is a many-to-many system with N users has N^2^ possible connections, which increases the site engagement and stickiness. That is, they are in the eyeball monetization business or are gearing up to enter it. So that's at best a warning sign.
I have to say I don't use Signal so I don't understand what is supposed to be great about it. I have a self-hosted Nextcloud (including Chat) and it was a hassle to install, but hasn't needed much attention since then. You can use either the Nextcloud app from F-droid or you can use an ordinary browser to chat over it, no app needed. That also means you can use a normal desktop computer instead of a phone. It does voice and video too, though those aren't so great.
Jitsi Meet is supposed to also be ok for self-hosting though I haven't tried doing that. I did play with their web client over their public instance (meet.jit.si) and that was quite nice.
GNU Jami unfortunately goes too far and tries to be serverless, and hits a bunch of reliability snags because of that. I tried to use it but just had too little success. I don't know if it's fixable without abandoning the underlying architecture. And, it needs an app. I think it's preferable to support browser clients even if a mobiie app is also available.
I haven't tried Matrix. I'm enough of a luddite to still use IRC but it has shortcomings for how people use chat these days. I don't know the web client picture for IRC or Matrix. I can say that Nextcloud Chat isn't that much different from Slack, from a non-technical user's perspective, if the user isn't trying to run a server. You just get a server URL and click on it in a browser. No app, unlike Signal as far as I know, so if anything it's simpler.
Encouraging the use of alternate servers on which only a handful of people can communicate instead of everyone who uses Signal is probably a net loss. Having to connect to multiple servers or switch servers to communicate with everyone a user wants to talk to sounds like a pretty bad experience. That would be different if it was federated. Co-founder Moxie Marlinspike has argued that federation would make it harder to achieve Signal's goals of bringing private communication to as many people as possible. I want him to be wrong about that, but my experiences with Matrix suggest he might not be.
I don't think so, in large part because they're structured as a nonprofit and have enough funding to last a while. I would think that about a venture-backed startup under similar circumstances.
It's just another messaging app in terms of UX. The value comes from:
Nextcloud Talk doesn't have end to end encryption. It's experimental on Jitsi. It's hard to justify not having that for a private messaging service in 2025.
This is not a good way to make my phone beep promptly when someone sends me an important message or ring when someone initiates a voice/video call. Browser notifications can be significantly delayed, especially on mobile devices. It's fine for the sort of public group conversations people have on Matrix and IRC, but a dealbreaker for most people in a primary one-to-one telecommunications system.
Is there even a desktop client for Signal? The mobile app isn't on F-droid so I can't easily install it (I don't use the Play store). Maybe i can get the APK from somewhere.
The other points are reasonably valid though the lack of end to end encryption is somewhat mitigated by self hosting.
I don't understand why browser notifications are slower than other types of app notifications, but I'm not an Android wizard so maye there's a reason. Does Signal require Google Play Services to get Firebase messages? I have that turned off too, so that's another annoyance / privacy invasion that I'd have to enable.
I don't particularly want Signal to be federated any more than I want all the world's websites to be federated. I want a zillion separate self-hosted non-federated servers, not like the tragic 1-way internet that we mostly have now. So your contacts file has something like email addresses in it, that tell the client what server to connect to for a given person.
Regardless of Signal's financial intentions there's no question that money and eyeballs hypnotize people and warps their minds. This happened to Wikipedia decades ago. They operate just like an internet startup where they obsess over user activity. They abandoned their vision of giving everyone in the world a free encyclopedia (i.e. every computer in the world has Wikipedia on its hard drive for completely private access) and instead focus on running a giant web site that constantly tracks people, gets censored, etc. They are swimming in money and are always asking for more anyway. I see Signal trying to reach a similar future.
Yes. There's also an experimental third-party client for desktop Linux called Flare. I've used Flare on some devices that the official client doesn't support and found it adequate. With some more maturity, I'll probably prefer it to the official client. Signal officially discourages third-party clients because it cannot guarantee their security but does not attempt to block them except in cases where specific clients are known to be compromised.
Account creation on the mobile app is recommended before using these as it relies on SMS verification. I don't like that, but it probably cuts down on spam; I've received exactly one spam on Signal in over 10 years of use.
Signal encourages installing from Google Play and uses Firebase messages by default, but does work without them. Given your set of preferences, however, you would probably prefer the third-party client Molly, which is on F-Droid and supports UnifiedPush.
That sounds like it ends up with properties similar to federation, but the client has to do all the work. The client would also need some means of identifying itself to all those random servers where there's a cost to creating new identities, or people would need to do key exchange when they exchange contact information. Without that, this proposed system would be overrun by spam as soon as it got popular.
Server-side federation solves a lot of problems. Why wouldn't you want that?
You can do that. The download with images is over 100gb compressed, and it expands to several terabytes. It's not hard to imagine why most people don't want to use it that way.
eh, just dont use it. beats a lot of other alternatives at the moment
You can remove ot from your view and then you forget it is even a thing