• Ferk@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 years ago

    And yet Telegram and Whatsapp do that and more.

    We are not comparing Signal with “messengers that do not use phone-numbers”. We are comparing it to messengers in the level of Telegram and Whatsapp, because the point was that placing it all on the same level isn’t accurate or fair. Reality isn’t Black&White.

    Signal is definitely flawed, but I’d much rather have people asking me to communicate via Signal than through Telegram/Whatsapp as they usually do. I do wish Signal was able to catter to that demografic.

    • poVoq@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 years ago

      Why? That is like saying lets only compare really bad options with slightly less bad options.

      Threema for example does not require phone numbers and there are also good XMPP based messengers.

      • Ferk@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 years ago

        Because “slightly less” is a subjective measure that’s relative to how pedantic we want to get.

        Even XMPP is a “slightly less” bad option, in the sense that you are still targetable when using a sufficiently advanced method, and you are still not free of risk.

        Even hosting your own instance you give away the IP, if you don’t host it then you do have to trust the host, since it does store metadata (maybe more so than Signal).