Recent submissions

Comment · 7 years ago
Sometimes I wonder if the motivation is to allow petty fraud as an outlet for crime, to keep the people who commit it from doing other less desirable things. Like a stealth welfare.
Comment · 7 years ago
If you want security and privacy to become mainstream, simply make it a boring, invisible implementation detail of your messenging platform which is superior in convenience

I believe that is precisely Signal's philosophy. Which is why for example it uses/requires a phone number instead of a username - which then people also complain about on HN and elsewhere. That it's less convenient than other messengers (which I don't dispute) is not for the lack of trying.

So I suspect the answer is the loudest users/commenters will "never" learn this.

Comment · 7 years ago
Comment · 7 years ago
"Open source" means the SOURCE CODE is OPEN. Which it is.

The internet is full of half-baked "secure" and "private" chat clients and servers. Security is hard to get right. I'm guessing they don't want the reputation of Signal muddled up with some other random client. IIUC anyone can run their own network, and make it as open as they like, using their code, they just can't call it Signal. Much like how Firefox and RedHat use their trademarks.

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton