… and I can’t even continue the chat from my phone.
Harddrives start at 16€/TB, so 500MB would be 0.008€. SSDs start at 50€/TB, so it would be 0.025€ or two-and-a-half cents
I don’t think people are worried about storing hundreds of Signal instances, this isn’t a photo backup.
The concerns are bloat, optimisation, and memory usage.
Also, HDDs can go from $7.5/TB
That’s the point. The storage is a bad metric. While it might indicate poor performance, it’s not a direct indication of poor performance. The bloat and optimization comes from the usage of Electron. And people use Electron because it’s far easier to make cross-platform deployments for Web and desktop using a framework like Electron. Show me the QT/JavaFX app that mimics Signal and we can compare the cost to develop it. Electron isn’t the best choice for memory usage and reducing bloat, but it’s the best choice for quick development (in my opinion but also proven out by the market share it has)
yes but think about how much money writing 500MB worth of code would cost.
I realize it’s not all code, and some of it is already written, but please, muse me, and do the math for it.
Writing less code costs more money. The programm is large because they slapped some existing stuff together instead of writing everything from scratch
This is why I moved to Telegram. Idk if it’s actually native, but often feels much more so, and less phone-centric than Signal which requires weird auth rituals involving the phone.
friendly reminder
https://www.tomsguide.com/news/signal-vs-telegram
If you care about security, stop using telegram.
Personally, I’m a big fan of XMPP, due to the inherent resiliency in being decentralized/federated, and due to the security provided by OMEMO (based on signal’s algorithm). Don’t have to worry about third-parties messing with my data if it stays on my server that’s in my house.
People want a chat app. If your secure chat app sucks as a chat app, it doesn’t matter how secure it is. It failed the primary use case it was meant to be developed for.
But keep in mind, Signal’s nature is no excuse to have shitty app implementations. In particular to have desktop apps as second-class citizens (and tablets as exterminated not-citizens). You can be a secure chat app. Signal got the secure part done, they’re just struggling with the chat app part.
Signal’s desktop app is as horrendously unusably bad as the project as a whole is good, tbh.
It’s no wonder people prefer stuff like Telegram. It has native apps and all. Or can be used in a browser. Meanwhile Signal is only used in a browser, but you have to download it and it fucks up font scaling and it shits the bed on font antialiasing and it can’t even get UI design consistent with the OS it’s running on and it won’t even use the OS emoji font.
Let’s not even mention how you still cannot use Signal on a tablet.
Yeah, I was going to say that I’ve used Signal on my Linux laptop and it’s janky af
Care to elaborate?
I use the app from the AUR and I don’t think I’ve had a single problem in 3 years.
And anytime you clicked on a link or image in the chat, you’ll have to click into the message field again (or press Ctrl+t) to be able to type a reply. I don’t understand how this absolutely infuriating thing hasn’t been fixed in years. Is nobody bothered by this? I want to be able to alt+tab into signal and just start typing ffs.
telegram has an “advantage” of not having e2e encryption by default, which makes stuff like sync much easier as chats are fully stored on the server (encrypted with your user password).
and if you enable encryption (aka start a secret chat), the chat will only exist on the device you started it on and stop getting synced
Sadly, it’s the only way I can contact someone to buy a decent quantity of weed in this state. I get less even if I go to a state where it’s legal and I pay more.
What’s so sad about it? You have the ability to securely send E2EE messages for free. I’m very pleased with Signal after using it for years.
If you mean it’s sad about the weed being hard to get / illegal… yeah, I concur. Hopefully Schedule III happens soon and nationwide Medical will be legal.
The inability to continue chat from phone is a feature.
New messages will show on all your devices, but yes, it is intentional that old messages are not available to new devices.
But if I reply on the phone will it populate the desktop chat and vice versa?
The chat continues on all linked devices from the point in time that they are linked.
Imagine two people having a face-to-face conversation, then a third person walks up and joins in. The third person doesn’t know what was said before they joined the conversation, but all three continue the conversation from that point on.
Linked devices are like the above example, if two of those people were married and tell each other every conversation they’ve had since their wedding.
Yes, as long as you set up the desktop client before sending the message.
Messages sent with Signal are encrypted per device, not per user, so if your desktop client doesn’t exist when the message is sent, it is never encrypted and sent for that device.
When you set up a new client, you will only see new messages.
See https://signal.org/docs/specifications/sesame/ for details.
This is because they don’t retain your (encrypted) messages on their servers right? Is this for storage reasons, or more just security philosophy of not being able to access past chats when you login from elsewhere?
This is not entirely correct. Messages are stored on their servers temporarily (last I saw, for up to 30 days), so that even if your device is offline for a while, you still get all your messages.
In theory, you could have messages waiting in your queue for device A, when you add device B, but device B will still not get the messages, even though the encrypted message is still on their servers.
This is because messages are encrypted per device, rather than per user. So if you have a friend who uses a phone and computer, and you also use a phone and computer, the client sending the message encrypts it three times, and sends each encrypted copy to the server. Each client then pulls its copy, and decrypts it. If a device does not exist when the message is encrypted and sent, it is never encrypted for that device, so that new device cannot pull the message down and decrypt it.
For more details: https://signal.org/docs/specifications/sesame/
What does this mean? I use my phone and computer, and they sync up in real-time without any issues.
Okay, but can’t it be an optional feature? I’d like it if a new device could download message history from an old device by having both online at the same time.
Optional how so? It’s a rotating key. Unless you have all of those keys to export into your computer, then you’ll be stuck with the current synced key.
You can still push old message history from your main device to your other devices, you can re-encrypt
