Skip to content

Signal – an ethical replacement for WhatsApp

Technology
91 61 0
  • This post did not contain any content.
  • This post did not contain any content.

    There are many such apps. The page links to EFF one which ranked some messaging apps and included stuff like Threema (though good luck getting anyone to use it because it's a paid version). Then, there is Briar, available on F Droid as well, which runs on a decentralised model but I don't think I know anyone IRL who has even heard of it.

    Telegram, I think, Atleast in my country is the second most popular thing behind WhatsApp but in it's default state, it's less secure and one needs to enable e2e encryption(read : secret chats).

    I am willing to move to almost any service ( I mean, I still use IRC, so..) but the main point is would anyone I know be on them? I once gave Signal a try but quickly wound uninstalling it because there was no one I knew there.

    I dislike WhatsApp as well (it's desktop variant is so slow and takes such a long time to sync messages plus Telegram has better inline support for images for example compared to Meta's version). It doesn't help that it's status page also promotes useless channels and that it is a hub of misinformation.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    After Trump was elected and inaugurated, Signal has finally been gaining some steam here in the Netherlands.

    It's still an American company, so it's not ideal. But it's still significantly better better than letting a tech giant like Facebook have control over the most commonly used chat app.

    WhatsApp needs to go and Signal is the most likely way in which we can achieve that. We can worry about the American elephant in the room later.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    It's ethical because it runs on donations and has a non-profit business model.

    Meta likely spends at least $1 billion a year running WhatsApp.

    Please donate to Signal if you use it.

  • There are many such apps. The page links to EFF one which ranked some messaging apps and included stuff like Threema (though good luck getting anyone to use it because it's a paid version). Then, there is Briar, available on F Droid as well, which runs on a decentralised model but I don't think I know anyone IRL who has even heard of it.

    Telegram, I think, Atleast in my country is the second most popular thing behind WhatsApp but in it's default state, it's less secure and one needs to enable e2e encryption(read : secret chats).

    I am willing to move to almost any service ( I mean, I still use IRC, so..) but the main point is would anyone I know be on them? I once gave Signal a try but quickly wound uninstalling it because there was no one I knew there.

    I dislike WhatsApp as well (it's desktop variant is so slow and takes such a long time to sync messages plus Telegram has better inline support for images for example compared to Meta's version). It doesn't help that it's status page also promotes useless channels and that it is a hub of misinformation.

    Signal has been a good option because you can get "normal" people to use it, which hasn't been true for many of the alternatives (except Telegram, but that's a mess).

  • There are many such apps. The page links to EFF one which ranked some messaging apps and included stuff like Threema (though good luck getting anyone to use it because it's a paid version). Then, there is Briar, available on F Droid as well, which runs on a decentralised model but I don't think I know anyone IRL who has even heard of it.

    Telegram, I think, Atleast in my country is the second most popular thing behind WhatsApp but in it's default state, it's less secure and one needs to enable e2e encryption(read : secret chats).

    I am willing to move to almost any service ( I mean, I still use IRC, so..) but the main point is would anyone I know be on them? I once gave Signal a try but quickly wound uninstalling it because there was no one I knew there.

    I dislike WhatsApp as well (it's desktop variant is so slow and takes such a long time to sync messages plus Telegram has better inline support for images for example compared to Meta's version). It doesn't help that it's status page also promotes useless channels and that it is a hub of misinformation.

    If you quickly uninstall it because you don’t know anyone using it it sounds like you’re part of the problem. If someone you know installs it to try it out that’s one less person they see as well. Personally I got the vast majority of my friend group to move to it years ago by just saying like “hey Facebook sucks we should move to signal”. If you don’t want to do that should at least leave it installed it’s not like it’s taking up much space

  • There are many such apps. The page links to EFF one which ranked some messaging apps and included stuff like Threema (though good luck getting anyone to use it because it's a paid version). Then, there is Briar, available on F Droid as well, which runs on a decentralised model but I don't think I know anyone IRL who has even heard of it.

    Telegram, I think, Atleast in my country is the second most popular thing behind WhatsApp but in it's default state, it's less secure and one needs to enable e2e encryption(read : secret chats).

    I am willing to move to almost any service ( I mean, I still use IRC, so..) but the main point is would anyone I know be on them? I once gave Signal a try but quickly wound uninstalling it because there was no one I knew there.

    I dislike WhatsApp as well (it's desktop variant is so slow and takes such a long time to sync messages plus Telegram has better inline support for images for example compared to Meta's version). It doesn't help that it's status page also promotes useless channels and that it is a hub of misinformation.

    Signal used to be the best answer to this conundrum, since it would use its own internal protocols if it could or fall back to SMS if it couldn't, unfortunately they decided to drop SMS support a few years ago, citing users that sent sensitive information not realizing they were using SMS (that always felt kinda flimsy). I really disliked this change, because it raised the difficulty of adoption, from just getting people to replace their default app with Signal to making them manage multiple apps.

    Now though, you basically need to advocate socially for the change you want to see in the world. Anecdotally, I started using Signal when they still supported SMS to talk with 1 friend group, and eventually convinced most of my closest family groups to also use it, many after SMS support was dropped. Apart from 1 tech illiterate elderly couple and 1 extended family member, I haven't received any personal (non-company related) text messages in like 5 months.

  • Signal has been a good option because you can get "normal" people to use it, which hasn't been true for many of the alternatives (except Telegram, but that's a mess).

    The problem is that it was easier to get people to move to Telegram since it had an abundance of features compared to WhatsApp which was compelling for the average person that doesn't care about encryption. Signal doesn't have any of these features that make it enticing for the person.

  • After Trump was elected and inaugurated, Signal has finally been gaining some steam here in the Netherlands.

    It's still an American company, so it's not ideal. But it's still significantly better better than letting a tech giant like Facebook have control over the most commonly used chat app.

    WhatsApp needs to go and Signal is the most likely way in which we can achieve that. We can worry about the American elephant in the room later.

    Sadly many still don't want to switch. My most active chats are in signal now but the large majority of chats are still on whatsapp

  • This post did not contain any content.

    For now anyways lol

  • If you quickly uninstall it because you don’t know anyone using it it sounds like you’re part of the problem. If someone you know installs it to try it out that’s one less person they see as well. Personally I got the vast majority of my friend group to move to it years ago by just saying like “hey Facebook sucks we should move to signal”. If you don’t want to do that should at least leave it installed it’s not like it’s taking up much space

    Quickly as in I had it for multiple months. Just like I did with Threema and Briar and XMPP apps and what not. Nobody ever showed up. There was a time when I was carrying more chat apps than folks I used to chat with

    There is technically one phonebook contact of mine on Signal but he primarily uses Telegram as primary chat thingy.

    It then occurred to me that IRL most folks don't care about chat apps. They care about chatting. The most I have seen folks are on Whatsapp, Telegram and Snapchat (last of which is really bad).

    Edit: there was/is Session as well. It started as a fork of Signal before moving to its own standard. It doesn't require even a phone number for verification. I think I once installed it for talking to a random stranger on the internet.

  • After Trump was elected and inaugurated, Signal has finally been gaining some steam here in the Netherlands.

    It's still an American company, so it's not ideal. But it's still significantly better better than letting a tech giant like Facebook have control over the most commonly used chat app.

    WhatsApp needs to go and Signal is the most likely way in which we can achieve that. We can worry about the American elephant in the room later.

    There is threema, a Swiss messenger that gained some popularity earlier since they had end to end encryption before whatsapp.

    Unfortunately the source code is not open (even though they do get annual audits with public reports), and the client costs 3 EUR or something (once).

  • There is threema, a Swiss messenger that gained some popularity earlier since they had end to end encryption before whatsapp.

    Unfortunately the source code is not open (even though they do get annual audits with public reports), and the client costs 3 EUR or something (once).

    They also offer Threema Libre on F-Droid for all us folks who degoogled their phone

  • This post did not contain any content.

    How about matrix?

  • There is threema, a Swiss messenger that gained some popularity earlier since they had end to end encryption before whatsapp.

    Unfortunately the source code is not open (even though they do get annual audits with public reports), and the client costs 3 EUR or something (once).

    Yeah, but Threema has basically no momentum behind it at all at this point.
    I'm putting my social capital behind the option that currently stands the most chance of beating out Whatsapp

  • For now anyways lol

    What does this mean

  • How about matrix?

  • Yeah, but Threema has basically no momentum behind it at all at this point.
    I'm putting my social capital behind the option that currently stands the most chance of beating out Whatsapp

    Threema has a pretty big momentum in some countries.

  • There are many such apps. The page links to EFF one which ranked some messaging apps and included stuff like Threema (though good luck getting anyone to use it because it's a paid version). Then, there is Briar, available on F Droid as well, which runs on a decentralised model but I don't think I know anyone IRL who has even heard of it.

    Telegram, I think, Atleast in my country is the second most popular thing behind WhatsApp but in it's default state, it's less secure and one needs to enable e2e encryption(read : secret chats).

    I am willing to move to almost any service ( I mean, I still use IRC, so..) but the main point is would anyone I know be on them? I once gave Signal a try but quickly wound uninstalling it because there was no one I knew there.

    I dislike WhatsApp as well (it's desktop variant is so slow and takes such a long time to sync messages plus Telegram has better inline support for images for example compared to Meta's version). It doesn't help that it's status page also promotes useless channels and that it is a hub of misinformation.

    A few friends of mine use Threema, because they care about privacy and are more than happy to pay to have it. Signal comes third, behind Telegram, even.

  • There is threema, a Swiss messenger that gained some popularity earlier since they had end to end encryption before whatsapp.

    Unfortunately the source code is not open (even though they do get annual audits with public reports), and the client costs 3 EUR or something (once).

    And Switzerlands records in terms of privacy sadly is far worse than most people think - even with the last attack being repelled.

    Matrix (preferably on a non-matrix.org instance) currently is the preferable non US and privacy friendly way.

  • 143 Stimmen
    62 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    R
    Tate is a symptom of the problem, though he does exacerbate it.
  • 48 Stimmen
    19 Beiträge
    9 Aufrufe
    mrjgyfly@lemmy.worldM
    Does that run the risk of leading to a future collapse of certain businesses, especially if their expenses remain consistently astronomical like OpenAI? Please note I don’t actually know—not trying to be cheeky with this question. Genuinely curious.
  • iFixit says the Switch 2 is even harder to repair than the original

    Technology technology
    126
    1
    699 Stimmen
    126 Beiträge
    25 Aufrufe
    Y
    My understanding is that if they've lasted at least a month and haven't died on you, you probably got a "good" batch and what you have now will be what it stays as for the most part, but a fair number of gulikits just sort of crap out at the 1-2 mo mark. So heads up on that.
  • Catbox.moe got screwed 😿

    Technology technology
    40
    55 Stimmen
    40 Beiträge
    16 Aufrufe
    archrecord@lemm.eeA
    I'll gladly give you a reason. I'm actually happy to articulate my stance on this, considering how much I tend to care about digital rights. Services that host files should not be held responsible for what users upload, unless: The service explicitly caters to illegal content by definition or practice (i.e. the if the website is literally titled uploadyourcsamhere[.]com then it's safe to assume they deliberately want to host illegal content) The service has a very easy mechanism to remove illegal content, either when asked, or through simple monitoring systems, but chooses not to do so (catbox does this, and quite quickly too) Because holding services responsible creates a whole host of negative effects. Here's some examples: Someone starts a CDN and some users upload CSAM. The creator of the CDN goes to jail now. Nobody ever wants to create a CDN because of the legal risk, and thus the only providers of CDNs become shady, expensive, anonymously-run services with no compliance mechanisms. You run a site that hosts images, and someone decides they want to harm you. They upload CSAM, then report the site to law enforcement. You go to jail. Anybody in the future who wants to run an image sharing site must now self-censor to try and not upset any human being that could be willing to harm them via their site. A social media site is hosting the posts and content of users. In order to be compliant and not go to jail, they must engage in extremely strict filtering, otherwise even one mistake could land them in jail. All users of the site are prohibited from posting any NSFW or even suggestive content, (including newsworthy media, such as an image of bodies in a warzone) and any violation leads to an instant ban, because any of those things could lead to a chance of actually illegal content being attached. This isn't just my opinion either. Digital rights organizations such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation have talked at length about similar policies before. To quote them: "When social media platforms adopt heavy-handed moderation policies, the unintended consequences can be hard to predict. For example, Twitter’s policies on sexual material have resulted in posts on sexual health and condoms being taken down. YouTube’s bans on violent content have resulted in journalism on the Syrian war being pulled from the site. It can be tempting to attempt to “fix” certain attitudes and behaviors online by placing increased restrictions on users’ speech, but in practice, web platforms have had more success at silencing innocent people than at making online communities healthier." Now, to address the rest of your comment, since I don't just want to focus on the beginning: I think you have to actively moderate what is uploaded Catbox does, and as previously mentioned, often at a much higher rate than other services, and at a comparable rate to many services that have millions, if not billions of dollars in annual profits that could otherwise be spent on further moderation. there has to be swifter and stricter punishment for those that do upload things that are against TOS and/or illegal. The problem isn't necessarily the speed at which people can be reported and punished, but rather that the internet is fundamentally harder to track people on than real life. It's easy for cops to sit around at a spot they know someone will be physically distributing illegal content at in real life, but digitally, even if you can see the feed of all the information passing through the service, a VPN or Tor connection will anonymize your IP address in a manner that most police departments won't be able to track, and most three-letter agencies will simply have a relatively low success rate with. There's no good solution to this problem of identifying perpetrators, which is why platforms often focus on moderation over legal enforcement actions against users so frequently. It accomplishes the goal of preventing and removing the content without having to, for example, require every single user of the internet to scan an ID (and also magically prevent people from just stealing other people's access tokens and impersonating their ID) I do agree, however, that we should probably provide larger amounts of funding, training, and resources, to divisions who's sole goal is to go after online distribution of various illegal content, primarily that which harms children, because it's certainly still an issue of there being too many reports to go through, even if many of them will still lead to dead ends. I hope that explains why making file hosting services liable for user uploaded content probably isn't the best strategy. I hate to see people with good intentions support ideas that sound good in practice, but in the end just cause more untold harms, and I hope you can understand why I believe this to be the case.
  • 93 Stimmen
    42 Beiträge
    6 Aufrufe
    G
    You don’t understand. The tracking and spying is the entire point of the maneuver. The ‘children are accessing porn’ thing is just a Trojan horse to justify the spying. I understand what are you saying, I simply don't consider to check if a law is applied as a Trojan horse in itself. I would agree if the EU had said to these sites "give us all the the access log, a list of your subscriber, every data you gather and a list of every IP it ever connected to your site", and even this way does not imply that with only the IP you could know who the user is without even asking the telecom company for help. So, is it a Trojan horse ? Maybe, it heavily depend on how the EU want to do it. If they just ask "show me how you try to avoid that a minor access your material", which normally is the fist step, I don't see how it could be a Trojan horse. It could become, I agree on that. As you pointed out, it’s already illegal for them to access it, and parents are legally required to prevent their children from accessing it. No, parents are not legally required to prevent it. The seller (or provider) is legally required. It is a subtle but important difference. But you don’t lock down the entire population, or institute pre-crime surveillance policies, just because some parents are not going to follow the law. True. You simply impose laws that make mandatories for the provider to check if he can sell/serve something to someone. I mean asking that the cashier of mall check if I am an adult when I buy a bottle of wine is no different than asking to Pornhub to check if the viewer is an adult. I agree that in one case is really simple and in the other is really hard (and it is becoming harder by the day). You then charge the guilty parents after the offense. Ok, it would work, but then how do you caught the offendind parents if not checking what everyone do ? Is it not simpler to try to prevent it instead ?
  • 7 Stimmen
    9 Beiträge
    7 Aufrufe
    V
    Ah yeah, that doesn't look like my cup of tea.
  • 33 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    4 Aufrufe
    J
    Apparently, it was required to be allowed in that state: Reading a bit more, during the sentencing phase in that state people making victim impact statements can choose their format for expression, and it's entirely allowed to make statements about what other people would say. So the judge didn't actually have grounds to deny it. No jury during that phase, so it's just the judge listening to free form requests in both directions. It's gross, but the rules very much allow the sister to make a statement about what she believes her brother would have wanted to say, in whatever format she wanted. From: https://sh.itjust.works/comment/18471175 influence the sentence From what I've seen, to be fair, judges' decisions have varied wildly regardless, sadly, and sentences should be more standardized. I wonder what it would've been otherwise.
  • Reddit will tighten verification to keep out human-like AI bots

    Technology technology
    24
    1
    84 Stimmen
    24 Beiträge
    4 Aufrufe
    O
    While I completely agree with you about the absence of one-liners and meme comments, and even more left leaning community, there's still that strong element of "gotcha" in discussions. Also tonnes of people not reading an article before commenting (at a better rate than Reddit probably), and a generally even more doomer attitude is common here.