I'm a big cryptocurrency skeptic, but if they had used a more reputable coin instead of a pre-mined coin distributed in such a fashion as to enrich the founders, they could have avoided most of this backlash. People who aren't enthusiasts already understand that the raison d'etre of the cryptocurrency landscape is to get rich quick, but these guys got so greedy they've even pissed off the enthusiast community. Unfortunately for Signal, the thrust of its popularity is among those users who have a pet peeve for the term "crypto" used as a shorthand for "cryptocurrency" instead of "cryptography". It'll be interesting to see Signal's public statement in regard to this PR disaster.
Agreed. Monero or ZCash would have gotten the job done, but it wouldn’t have enriched the founders.
Pre-mined altcoin scams have been around so long that everyone in the crypto world knows to avoid them. Building up a dedicated following of people using an encrypted messenger app was a genius way of submarining a pre-mined crypto scam into an unsuspecting userbase.
I suspect a lot of us are going back to all of the people we recommended Signal to and revising our recommendations to avoid the cryptocurrency portion of the app.
I'm actually going to go out on a limb and defend their choice of MobileCoin.
Signal has always been a decent privacy/convenience tradeoff and MobileCoin is no different. Features like phone numbers and contact uploading were always a user friendly tradeoff. They also seem to trust SGX.
Monero's isn't slow by any means but isn't fast either. UI changes can alleviate the issue but being unable to spend your entire balance until the next block is a step back in UX.
ZCash's lack of privacy by default doesn't fit with Signal's E2E by default ethos.
Using most privacy coins on a mobile device with limited storage is a privacy tradeoff no matter how you cut it.
The reality is that integrating a cryptocurrency for payments into Signal was probably the actual misstep rather than their selection of which token to use.
After convincing all my friends to move from WhatsApp to Signal I am really annoyed about this move. This really damaged the trust I have for Signal. I hope they realize their mistake quickly and drop this idea.
I think it won't be problematic as if someone doesn't want to create wallet they dont have to. So this payment option will be for only those who wants to enable it.
I see no good way out of this, if someone forks it and removes all that extra attack surface I guess Moxie will fight it, as he doesn't want many compatible clients.
And if the crypto features stays in there it will become another avenue for pump-and-dump schemes, so I can no longer recommend it to people without looking like a crypto hustler.
1. Anger from purists who care about the fact it's not decentralised, and that Moxie runs the show, and that it uses phone numbers etc etc...
2. Indifference from those who have never heard of it
3. Joy from those who are extremely happy a decent, private, alternative to Facebook/Whatsapp exists
My worry is that group 1) try and ruin it for the rest of us.
Signal is literally the only product I can get my family to use which provides E2E messaging and prevents mass surveillance. But Signal needs to keep core feature parity to remain competitive with WhatsApp, Telegram etc. And that includes a payment mechanism.
I am in group 4. I didn’t care that Moxie calls the shots and requires a phone number. And I was thrilled to have a secure communication app, from when Signal was TextSecure. I hate this to the point that I’m dropping Signal.
The only reason to choose MobileCoin is Moxie’s personal affiliation to it. Meanwhile, this integration massively increases Signal’s regulatory cross section.
Most Americans strongly support free speech. That support doesn’t exist for dark money transactions. If the CFTC or New York DFS wanted to open a money laundering investigation into Signal, using the full AML/ATF toolkit in the process, there isn’t a great argument anymore for why they can’t or shouldn’t. Same for the Secret Service or FBI. Moxie just sold out Signal’s First Amendment credentials.
I don't like crypto, but I especially don't like random shitcoins that I've never heard of because they generally are only used for pump-and-dump schemes.
Anyways, my trust in Signal seems to be monotonically decreasing over time. Such is how it works, unfortunately.
Signal is really just another in a long line of siloed messengers. Eventually the people running the system do something obnoxious. Such things do not have a future.
Any system that has not reached the point that the bits and pieces are controlled by different entities should be considered just a technology demonstration. Signal has never even been close to "the best app we have out there".
I am suffering from messaging app fatigue, using WhatsApp, Signal, Telegram and iMessage on Android and/or iOS. No sooner than witnessing a significant portion of my contact list migrating to Signal from WhatsApp, after the ToC/privacy debacle, now there is another spanner in the works.
Telegram failed with the TON project, trying to mix oil with water, in their attempt at cryptofying their platform. Signal should focus on solidifying their lead, and provide core messaging features with robust privacy, instead of a scattergun approach. Elsewhere, WhatsApp is already attempting to make a come-back with new cross-platform/multi device features, to eat away at all the gains.
Remember 20 years ago when everyone was fatigued from running ICQ, MSN Messenger, AOL Instant Messesnger, and Yahoo! Messenger? At least we had Trillian which let us pretend they were all one app.
I find this line of criticism more palatable than that of the other front page link[0].
Criticizing the trash(?)coin - and then criticing signal by association - muddies the discussion just like implementing payments in a (seemingly?) private communication tool muddies the mission of signal.
Personally I think of transfer of value as important as transfer of speech/information so, it makes sense for signal (or other messengers) to want to include it. But associating themselves with a new project that has had little scrutiny seems to be a mistake because:
- people question if this new product won't negatively degrade the privacy assurances that signal has had so far
- people will associate plenty of previous cryptoscams to this new effort
Why oh why was it not the first priority to move from phone numbers to random user IDs (like Threema) for identification? And instead come up with a crypto currency integration?
This whole crypto coin focus, the BS about the server code and the total inability to address criticism or be transparent about development made me lose hope in the project.
It should be obvious by now that signal is aiming for a different balance of user friendliness and privacy. At this point it seems unlikely that they'd change their minds on phone numbers.
Payments in chat is inevitable. I think that eventually all chat will have convenient payments or people will stop using it. Of course that doesn't necessarily mean cryptocurrencies, but until the large financial companies get involved (and they are notoriously risk averse), cryptocurrencies are a natural way to do this.
As well as secure chat already needing much of the same key management infrastructure that cryptocurrencies need, it also hooks you into social networks - so you could have key recovery schemes where you trust a number of friends to hold portions of your backup keys (somewhat like what you probably do with your real life house keys).
Trust, money and communication are all network phenomena, and using the same fabric for them all makes a lot of sense.
>I see no good reason to do this. Secure communications and secure transactions can be separate apps,
The reason is pretty clear. Transactions require two parties to both be using the app. If you spin out a separate app, then most people won't have it installed nor be able to use it, and therefore won't be able to transact with it. This leads to a chicken and egg problem: if no one is using the app, then there's no point downloading and becoming familiar with it. By integrating with an existing, popular app in an adjacent space (messaging apps traditionally enable payments as well), they avoid this bootstrapping problem.
That said, it seems quite dumb to pick a premined currency to enable all this. That will inevitably raise questions about who stands to gain from the success of the system. Someone should come up with a way to make cryptocurrencies that are worthless for speculators, and only good for paying for things. Then, any new crypto project would have an easy way to avoid accusations of being a pump-and-dump.
I imagine signal+mob will have an honest foundation-style grant system which will give tons of money to groups that did not get included in the first crypto wave.
Mirroring the sibling comment here, moxie has been very open that this is his project, top down. He moves as fast as he wants and he steers wherever he thinks is appropriate. This is one of the main reasons Signal doesn't federate - he thought it'd bring iteration speed to a halt.
(And let's be honest, if XMPP and the A3-sized spreadsheet you need for to pick a client based on XEP support is anything to go by, this is not undue concern.)
Among people I know, most individuals send money to each other via Venmo. This presents two problems: how to be sure you're sending money to the right person, and, the transaction is data-mined by Paypal. So, having payments inside of Signal actually would solve both those problems (if both people are using Signal).
It could also be, that Signal is trying to turn their app into a platform, like WeChat.
I go to a restaurant with some friends. The bill comes and it’s in USD because of course it’s in USD. One guy puts down his card because he plays cc miles games and anyway the waitress doesn’t want to deal with multiple cards. He gets home, logs on to Venmo and requests my share from me—-in USD. I click accept, the money comes out of my bank account, which is in USD because of course it is, and goes into his Venmo account. That’s the last I ever have to think about it. There’s no 1099B coming.
Crypto makes this story much, much worse for very little gain.
1. Do most people actually care enough about PayPal knowing about their Venmo transactions to sacrifice ease-of-use and use a cryptocurrency instead? Is it worth having to endure volatility and have to deal with exchanges just to hide that split restaurant bill?
2. How does using a Cryptocurrency connected to Signal ensure greater confidence that you are transacting with the correct person than using Venmo connected to PayPal?
Because instead of supporting the coins that exist (Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash, Ethererum, Monero etc.), some better than others, they did their own coin and the creators of that coin own most of it.
They could also have just have added a payment API and let anyone develop against that.
Well it doesn't 'just work' on all platforms or contexts. That's why it's a bit annoying for them to spend dev time on stuff like this, especially when they could have used whatever pre-existing/established coin.
It's good that you added WTF to the title so I can know in advance how to feel about the news.
Without it I would have actually needed to actually read the article before forming my opinion, but now I can go into it with the right mindset, or even better skip straight to the comment section already enraged. Thanks!
---
Please note that I am complaining about the headline baiting. While I believe that crypto is the future I agree with the sentiment that the way Signal went and did it was poorly handled at best and shady at worst.
If Signal really cared, they would've chosen a better cryptocurrency.
MobileCoin is not a "real", decentralized cryptocurrency like Bitcoin.
All of the initial supply is owned by the MobileCoin foundation and all TX fees go to them. Without this partnership nobody would've cared besides a few speculators.
[+] [-] nindalf|5 years ago|reply
Consensus - WTF?
[+] [-] FlyingSnake|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] root_axis|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] PragmaticPulp|5 years ago|reply
Pre-mined altcoin scams have been around so long that everyone in the crypto world knows to avoid them. Building up a dedicated following of people using an encrypted messenger app was a genius way of submarining a pre-mined crypto scam into an unsuspecting userbase.
I suspect a lot of us are going back to all of the people we recommended Signal to and revising our recommendations to avoid the cryptocurrency portion of the app.
[+] [-] qqii|5 years ago|reply
Signal has always been a decent privacy/convenience tradeoff and MobileCoin is no different. Features like phone numbers and contact uploading were always a user friendly tradeoff. They also seem to trust SGX.
Monero's isn't slow by any means but isn't fast either. UI changes can alleviate the issue but being unable to spend your entire balance until the next block is a step back in UX.
ZCash's lack of privacy by default doesn't fit with Signal's E2E by default ethos.
Using most privacy coins on a mobile device with limited storage is a privacy tradeoff no matter how you cut it.
The reality is that integrating a cryptocurrency for payments into Signal was probably the actual misstep rather than their selection of which token to use.
[+] [-] kentiko|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jayp1418|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] numbsafari|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] KingOfCoders|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] anddddd1|5 years ago|reply
if anything this is a progressive move that fits perfectly with their mission.
Having said that they should have used bitcoin or monero
[+] [-] capitol_|5 years ago|reply
And if the crypto features stays in there it will become another avenue for pump-and-dump schemes, so I can no longer recommend it to people without looking like a crypto hustler.
[+] [-] henearkr|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] agd|5 years ago|reply
1. Anger from purists who care about the fact it's not decentralised, and that Moxie runs the show, and that it uses phone numbers etc etc...
2. Indifference from those who have never heard of it
3. Joy from those who are extremely happy a decent, private, alternative to Facebook/Whatsapp exists
My worry is that group 1) try and ruin it for the rest of us.
Signal is literally the only product I can get my family to use which provides E2E messaging and prevents mass surveillance. But Signal needs to keep core feature parity to remain competitive with WhatsApp, Telegram etc. And that includes a payment mechanism.
[+] [-] JumpCrisscross|5 years ago|reply
I am in group 4. I didn’t care that Moxie calls the shots and requires a phone number. And I was thrilled to have a secure communication app, from when Signal was TextSecure. I hate this to the point that I’m dropping Signal.
The only reason to choose MobileCoin is Moxie’s personal affiliation to it. Meanwhile, this integration massively increases Signal’s regulatory cross section.
Most Americans strongly support free speech. That support doesn’t exist for dark money transactions. If the CFTC or New York DFS wanted to open a money laundering investigation into Signal, using the full AML/ATF toolkit in the process, there isn’t a great argument anymore for why they can’t or shouldn’t. Same for the Secret Service or FBI. Moxie just sold out Signal’s First Amendment credentials.
[+] [-] helen___keller|5 years ago|reply
Anyways, my trust in Signal seems to be monotonically decreasing over time. Such is how it works, unfortunately.
[+] [-] upofadown|5 years ago|reply
Any system that has not reached the point that the bits and pieces are controlled by different entities should be considered just a technology demonstration. Signal has never even been close to "the best app we have out there".
[+] [-] 45ure|5 years ago|reply
Telegram failed with the TON project, trying to mix oil with water, in their attempt at cryptofying their platform. Signal should focus on solidifying their lead, and provide core messaging features with robust privacy, instead of a scattergun approach. Elsewhere, WhatsApp is already attempting to make a come-back with new cross-platform/multi device features, to eat away at all the gains.
https://www.androidcentral.com/whatsapp-will-soon-let-you-tr...
[+] [-] timbit42|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 627467|5 years ago|reply
Criticizing the trash(?)coin - and then criticing signal by association - muddies the discussion just like implementing payments in a (seemingly?) private communication tool muddies the mission of signal.
Personally I think of transfer of value as important as transfer of speech/information so, it makes sense for signal (or other messengers) to want to include it. But associating themselves with a new project that has had little scrutiny seems to be a mistake because: - people question if this new product won't negatively degrade the privacy assurances that signal has had so far - people will associate plenty of previous cryptoscams to this new effort
[0] https://www.stephendiehl.com/blog/signal.html
[+] [-] ruph123|5 years ago|reply
This whole crypto coin focus, the BS about the server code and the total inability to address criticism or be transparent about development made me lose hope in the project.
[+] [-] romanovcode|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] qqii|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kybernetikos|5 years ago|reply
As well as secure chat already needing much of the same key management infrastructure that cryptocurrencies need, it also hooks you into social networks - so you could have key recovery schemes where you trust a number of friends to hold portions of your backup keys (somewhat like what you probably do with your real life house keys).
Trust, money and communication are all network phenomena, and using the same fabric for them all makes a lot of sense.
[+] [-] syrrim|5 years ago|reply
The reason is pretty clear. Transactions require two parties to both be using the app. If you spin out a separate app, then most people won't have it installed nor be able to use it, and therefore won't be able to transact with it. This leads to a chicken and egg problem: if no one is using the app, then there's no point downloading and becoming familiar with it. By integrating with an existing, popular app in an adjacent space (messaging apps traditionally enable payments as well), they avoid this bootstrapping problem.
That said, it seems quite dumb to pick a premined currency to enable all this. That will inevitably raise questions about who stands to gain from the success of the system. Someone should come up with a way to make cryptocurrencies that are worthless for speculators, and only good for paying for things. Then, any new crypto project would have an easy way to avoid accusations of being a pump-and-dump.
[+] [-] jerry1979|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] eplanit|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bo0tzz|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] yoelo|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] detaro|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sascha_sl|5 years ago|reply
(And let's be honest, if XMPP and the A3-sized spreadsheet you need for to pick a client based on XEP support is anything to go by, this is not undue concern.)
[+] [-] progx|5 years ago|reply
Oh and i need a secure key for my car.
If you had time, i need password manager within my messenger too.
A secure todo list would be great.
Not everything you can include into ONE app should be included.
[+] [-] johnchristopher|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] firebaze|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] grafporno|5 years ago|reply
Yeah, except that pesky server, right.
[+] [-] ddevault|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dunefox|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bildung|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] brnt|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nix0n|5 years ago|reply
It could also be, that Signal is trying to turn their app into a platform, like WeChat.
[+] [-] bradleyjg|5 years ago|reply
Crypto makes this story much, much worse for very little gain.
[+] [-] RIMR|5 years ago|reply
2. How does using a Cryptocurrency connected to Signal ensure greater confidence that you are transacting with the correct person than using Venmo connected to PayPal?
[+] [-] kreetx|5 years ago|reply
I use it, seems like an e2ee and uncluttered messaging app that just works.
[+] [-] fennecfoxen|5 years ago|reply
> uncluttered messaging app that just works.
Cryptocurrency turns it into a cluttered messaging app, one that gives hackers extra financial incentives to compromise it.
[+] [-] sschueller|5 years ago|reply
They could also have just have added a payment API and let anyone develop against that.
[+] [-] carmen_sandiego|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] birracerveza|5 years ago|reply
Without it I would have actually needed to actually read the article before forming my opinion, but now I can go into it with the right mindset, or even better skip straight to the comment section already enraged. Thanks!
---
Please note that I am complaining about the headline baiting. While I believe that crypto is the future I agree with the sentiment that the way Signal went and did it was poorly handled at best and shady at worst.
[+] [-] 1023bytes|5 years ago|reply
MobileCoin is not a "real", decentralized cryptocurrency like Bitcoin. All of the initial supply is owned by the MobileCoin foundation and all TX fees go to them. Without this partnership nobody would've cared besides a few speculators.