• Kalcifer@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    5·
    21 days ago

    Signal isn’t federated [1][2][3.1]; it’s decentralized [1][2][3.2]. Though, for all practical purposes, I would generally argue that it’s centralized.

    References
    1. Signal-Server. signalapp. Github. Published: 2025-01-31T15:34:14.000Z. Accessed: 2025-02-01T09:24Z. https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server.
      • This is the source code for the server that Signal uses.
    2. “Signal (software)”. Wikipedia. Published: 2025-01-06T09:34Z. Accessed: 2025-02-1T09:30Z. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_(software).
      • ¶“Architecture”. ¶“Servers”.

        Signal relies on centralized servers that are maintained by Signal Messenger. In addition to routing Signal’s messages, the servers also facilitate the discovery of contacts who are also registered Signal users and the automatic exchange of users’ public keys. […]

    3. “Reflections: The ecosystem is moving”. moxie0. Signal Blog. Published: 2016-05-10. Accessed: 2025-02-01T09:40Z. https://signal.org/blog/the-ecosystem-is-moving/.
      1. ¶5. to ¶“Stuck in time”. ¶3-6

        One of the controversial things we did with Signal early on was to build it as an unfederated service. Nothing about any of the protocols we’ve developed requires centralization; it’s entirely possible to build a federated Signal Protocol-based messenger, but I no longer believe that it is possible to build a competitive federated messenger at all. […] [interoperable protocols] [have] taken us pretty far, but it’s undeniable that once you federate your protocol, it becomes very difficult to make changes. And right now, at the application level, things that stand still don’t fare very well in a world where the ecosystem is moving. […] Early on, I thought we’d federate Signal once its velocity had subsided. Now I realize that things will probably never slow down, and if anything the velocity of the entire landscape seems to be steadily increasing.

      2. ¶“Stuck in time”. “Federation and control”. ¶6.

        An open source infrastructure for a centralized network now provides almost the same level of control as federated protocols, without giving up the ability to adapt. If a centralized provider with an open source infrastructure ever makes horrible changes, those that disagree have the software they need to run their own alternative instead. It may not be as beautiful as federation, but at this point it seems that it will have to do.

    • jollyrogue@lemmy.mlEnglish
      1·
      21 days ago

      Yeah, Moxie has openly shot down the idea of adding federation to Signal, and I’ve never heard them claim Signal was decentralized.

      Matrix is federated, distributed, and decentralized.

      XMPP is federated and decentralized.

        • jollyrogue@lemmy.mlEnglish
          1·
          20 days ago

          Matrix servers keep a copy of any remote room an account on the server has joined, and it’s possible to recreate a room from the copies held on different servers. There are more details I don’t remember, but at a high level that’s how it’s distributed.

          Storing messages of remote rooms in addition to local rooms is why people complain about the storage requirements of Matrix servers. They don’t realize it’s distributed.

    • Lazycog@sopuli.xyzEnglish
      1·
      21 days ago

      Yeah. I love Signal but it doesn’t belong in that list. Dansup (creator of loops and pixelfed) is apparently working on “Sup” that will be a decentralized alternative to whatsapp.

        • Lazycog@sopuli.xyzEnglish
          1·
          21 days ago

          Yeah… I’m bit afraid of “kbin Ernest Effect” (not sure what a proper term is) where personal issues pile up and the sole head developer just disappears.

          Haven’t followed dansup much but from what I understand he is much more open to pull requests and listening to the community, but time will tell. Right now I appreciate and love his effort, giving, and the impact on fediverse he is brining.

          The kickstarter was a good idea.

          • ApollosArrow@lemmy.worldEnglish
            1·
            21 days ago

            Given that I’ve waited 3 weeks to join his smaller instance of pixelfed.art, I can tell things are already piling up. I am hoping the kickstarter does help.

        • Lazycog@sopuli.xyzEnglish
          1·
          21 days ago

          There isn’t much information about “Sup”, but if I had to guess it could be that dansup is making sup app with XMPP(rotocol) as the messaging protocol.

          • poVoq@slrpnk.netEnglish
            1·
            21 days ago

            Originally it was supposed to be ActivityPub based, but recently they posted something about it being for XMPP, Matrix and IRC as well 🤷‍♂️ Maybe they decided to fork Pidgin 😂

            IMHO Sup. isn’t going to happen. They will have their hands more than full with Pixelfed’s new popularity and maybe Loops.

      • Kalcifer@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        1·
        21 days ago

        My comment wasn’t protesting the use of Signal; it was rather clarifying the misinformation in OP’s post — ie misinformation that Signal is a federated service.

    • amzd@lemmy.worldEnglish
      01·
      21 days ago

      it’s decentralized

      No it’s not. From literally your own comment:

      Signal relies on centralized servers

      For a decentralized messenger use https://delta.chat/

      • Kalcifer@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        1·
        21 days ago

        it’s decentralized

        No it’s not. From literally your own comment:

        Signal relies on centralized servers

        I was using “decentralized” to mean that there isn’t centralized control over ownership of the service in general — eg anyone can spin up their own server (impractical, imo, pushing it more towards being centralized) and people can use it (making it decentralized, imo (Please correct me if I am wrong, but I do think my usage of the term is appropriate in this way.)), but people who use that server can only communicate with that server (making it not federated). But yes it could still be said to be centralized in that it operates on a client-server model [1].

        This is more an argument of definitions, though. I’m not trying to claim anything in bad faith.

        References
        1. Signal-Server. signalapp. Github. Published: 2025-01-31T15:34:14.000Z. Accessed: 2025-02-01T09:24Z. https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Server.
          • This is the source code for the server that Signal uses.
  • breadguyyyyyyyyy@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    1·
    20 days ago

    I keep seeing this type stuff but neither peertube or friendica are genuine replacements at this point, mastodon is weaksauce compared to akkoma or a misskey fork, and loops is alpha software. also yes signal is centralized but it just works and has contact discovery so it owns matrix and xmpp when compared to whatsapp. basically none of this stuff is truly ready

    • Meldrik@lemmy.wtfEnglish
      0·
      20 days ago

      As software, PeerTube is great and there’s actually plenty of content to consume if you can find it. The more content creators we can get to use PeerTube, the more appealing PeerTube will also become.

      Check this link out, if looking for content: https://peertube.wtf/

      • megrania@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
        1·
        20 days ago

        “If you can find it” … that’s the crucial point I suppose … but without a discovery algorithm, interesting creators, and a VAST content archive, it can hardly be called an “alternative” for YouTube.

        When I was looking into it I found the best use case was to use it as a self-hosted video archive to replace/extend my Vimeo. At least at that point, all instances that were remotely interesting were not taking any users, and the generic ones seemed to be very far away from what I’m doing content-wise.

        And I guess as long as that’s the case, and you have no ways to monetize content nor any significant reach due to the federated fragmentation, I don’t think it’s an interesting software/federated platform for creators …

          • megrania@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
            0·
            20 days ago

            I’m running my own instance, and typically post my stuff on mastodon, so I guess I have made the first step?

            It’s a bit of a Catch-22 I suppose … low numbers of viewers makes it less attractive for creators, and fewer interesting creators make it less attractive for viewers.

            Taking into account the other aspects that make it less attractive for viewers (fragmentation and inconvenience … having to dig through “Find the right instance for you” tutorials, no matter how well curated, can be a bit of a turn-off compared to just going to a central point and find what you’re looking for), I don’t have that much hope that it’ll reach a critical mass of both viewers and creators to catapult Peertube into large-scale relevance … as sad as I am about saying that.