@771c7916

I've never used (and prolly never will) #Whatsapp. As I understand, is only Signal protocol anyway with back doors installed of some form... not that I pay any attention to proprietary products like that.

But IMO, #Signal's not gaining any "global standard" status accolades until, at the very least, they remove the #DID requirement, drop #contact_database_farming, and ensure that email is optional too.

And then there's the hard requirement that it be #decentralized.

#tallship

⛵

.

https://cdn.fosstodon.org/media_attachments/files/111/064/399/462/135/503/original/d65c6c1a0d7ab64d.jpeg 

 @9165b494 I think it is the Signal app though with the DID requirement? I'm not sure the protocol actually needs it.

The real reason tho for the interoperability, is not really for us non-WhatsApp users to connect, but I think more for existing WhatsApp users who want to leave, but feel trapped by having most of their friends only using WhatsApp. 

 @771c7916

Yes that's indeed a common complaint (fear, even?) That those users cite for remaining.

I should also apologize, there's a growing ambiguity wrt "DID" - in this context, I was using it in the correct standards context (Direct Inward Dial); i.e., a phone number 🙂

The acronym has taken on another entirely different meaning as of late, although amusingly enough, both do relate to unique identifiers for people 👍

Thanks for your (as always) insightful observations Danie!

#tallship

⛵

. 

 @9165b494 yes my biggest worry is that whatever inter-connectivity, it really needs to be based on a neutral identifier, and not phone number or e-mail address. WhatsApp, Signal and Telegram love their telephone number for discoverability. Ironically this weakness in privacy unfortunately also results in them having the biggest messaging networks (they know that).