Conversation

Notices

1. Dmytri (dk@tldr.nettime.org)'s status on Monday, 05-Dec-2022 22:01:10 UTC Dmytri

   • Clayton Dewey
   • cherti

   @cherti @clayton OTF, not Signal, is Radio Free Asia 2.0. It literally is.

   It's good to hear it's possible to use desktop without your phone on, and I'm sorry if I misunderstood before. My impression was at one point the only way to use Signal on your laptop was if your phone is connected. My mistake.

   Your comment is dishonest tho, since it's clear, even to you i'm sure, that you are using a fallacy, being wrong about one thing in no way indicates error about another. I'll take it as a joke due to the smiley, but it does make you seem a bit desperate to defend Signal.

   If they remove the requirement to disclose a phone number then that would be an improvement, at least for the people already using Signal due to it being widely promoted as a secure tool for activists and dissidents, many of whom may not know better or have a choice.

   Tho as you correctly point out, it would still be problematic because of the fact that they are funded by the regime change industrial complex, have no business model, and refuse to federate with any other servers. So thanks for pointing that out again. Something that didn't tie to you to an intelligence-affiliated centralized server operator would indeed be better. You are right!

   • cherti (cherti@chaos.social)'s status on Monday, 05-Dec-2022 22:02:19 UTC cherti

     in reply to

     • Clayton Dewey

     @dk @clayton

     The business model, if you wanna call it that, is a private messenger for evreyone, financed by donations (which has been clearly communicated, particularly lately). In contrast to for example Matrix, there is no venture capital involved, it is a donation-funded non-profit (which has also been clearly communicated).

     I would be curious which business model you would recommend instead for a sustainable messaging solution and how you would start such development, if the OTF is evil?