Kent Borg wrote: > I think the Signal people are sympathetic to your plight, but I think > they don't want a low friction flood of bot-like accounts.
But if they were willing to offer a full-featured desktop client (or even a semifunctional one) that only required a mobile number to work, and didn't demand that the user owns an app phone, the fact that the user would have to obtain a mobile number does impose some friction, and I suppose also some monetary cost for bot-runners. And if that's not enough cost/friction to discourage bots, they could offer a premium desktop client that's standalone (no app phone requirement) and charge a nominal one-time fee for it (with an option to pay in Bitcoin): still an improvement over the status quo from the user's perspective. So, I don't believe that the Signal developers' decision here turns simply on trying to prevent bot-like accounts through friction. Even if that's part of what went into their decision, it doesn't seem to be all of it. I notice that a lot of people become invested in the idea that we don't have to give consideration to those without app phones. Even people who, in one corner of their mind, consider privacy important, and who realize that app phones impose a loss of privacy, will still often actively contribute to the social pressure to use app phones, show a lack of respect for those who don't, and refuse to accommodate those without app phones in all sorts of ways. I suppose it's an example of the familiar pattern where Americans are indoctrinated into thinking that they're participating in and supporting science and the march of progress simply by purchasing and using digital entertainment products which are addictive, disempowering, and built to spy in ways that are against the user's interests. So although I hate to say it, I suppose it's possible that the Signal developers have made the decision they did for reasons that may not be all that good: maybe they've bought into this much-hyped notion that everyone who matters does or should have a "smartphone", and maybe they're reluctant to maintain their product on an additional platform. I truly would not be too surprised if these sorts of bad reasons, along with thin excuses about things like bot-prevention that don't really hold water, are what's making the difference here. But on the other hand, perhaps it's possible that the Signal developers actually have good reasons for not offering even a minimal standalone desktop client, reasons that actually do hold water -- I just can't see yet what those reasons could be, and at the very least the Signal developers are far from publicly and frankly explaining their reasons. I suppose on the whole I tend to think that whatever their concerns are, I'm not entirely convinced that their reasons hold water in the end. And I think that given the fact that Signal is a system that's meant for privacy, it's surprising that they don't have more publicly visible concern for those who avoid evilphones for privacy reasons. (There may be a case for believing that Android & iOS are just as much the oppressive operating systems of today as Windows was in the past.) Anyway, I have a hunch that some workaround may be possible in order to use Signal on Linux without an evilphone, I'm just asking in case anyone has some idea what that workaround might be. On Sat, Jul 27, 2024, at 9:43 PM, Kent Borg wrote: > On 7/27/24 11:05, Randall Rose wrote: >> I do have a mobile number which is for a flip phone, not an app phone -- is >> there some way that number can be used to set up Signal on Ubuntu? > > I don't think so. For a moment I thought you might put your SIM in > someone friend's phone long enough to set up Signal, but I think the > Linux version will quit working once you take your SIM back and your > friend deletes Signal from the phone. > > > I think the Signal people are sympathetic to your plight, but I think > they don't want a low friction flood of bot-like accounts. Not only > would it make Signal spam a problem (I have received almost zero in the > several years I have been on Signal), they would have to pay the server > costs for extra traffic. > > > -kb > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > Discuss@driftwood.blu.org > https://driftwood.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@driftwood.blu.org https://driftwood.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
