The author of this post believes that by making a stand over Signal policies he doesn't like (the superficial GCM dep, the OWS-only server policy, the contact list discovery system), something more like LibreSignal will grow to take Signal's place.
The author is wrong. LibreSignal won't replace Signal. Something like Telegram will: an "open source" messaging system with inferior cryptography, "opt-in" end-to-end messaging, a long-term dependency on the telephone system for authentication, and a far "cuddlier" personality with its users and, more importantly, with people from the app development community (like the author). Telegram will continue to gain adoption, because sexy beats sound in every end-user match up. Signal is the closest thing sound cryptography has to a palatable solution for end users.
Iran has already compromised Telegram users, because it systemically trades security off for user adoption. They'll get more of them, and people will hang from cranes as a result.
It's not wrong to criticize Signal. Signal does things I don't love, too! But we should be clear-eyed about the market.
The author is wrong. LibreSignal won't replace Signal. Something like Telegram will: an "open source" messaging system with inferior cryptography, "opt-in" end-to-end messaging, a long-term dependency on the telephone system for authentication, and a far "cuddlier" personality with its users and, more importantly, with people from the app development community (like the author). Telegram will continue to gain adoption, because sexy beats sound in every end-user match up. Signal is the closest thing sound cryptography has to a palatable solution for end users.
Iran has already compromised Telegram users, because it systemically trades security off for user adoption. They'll get more of them, and people will hang from cranes as a result.
It's not wrong to criticize Signal. Signal does things I don't love, too! But we should be clear-eyed about the market.