Comment on ‘There isn’t really another choice:’ Signal chief explains why the encrypted messenger relies on AWS

• vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  For the purpose of “shoot a message, go offline and be certain it’s sent” it’s the same service.

  source

  • blah3166@piefed.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    If sending a message is the only requirement, email fits the bill and has worked for half a century. If we’re being real, the reason Signal “can’t do what Telegram does” is because Telegram doesn’t even attempt to do what Signal does. Signal is tackling a much bigger problem.

    source

    • vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      What are you talking about?

      I’m saying that the parts of infrastructure needed to accept a message to the service from the client application, encrypted or not, associated to a user or not, are under same requirements for Signal and Telegram.

      I don’t know if you understand that every big service is basically its own 90s’ Internet self-contained, and what accepts your messages is pretty similar to an SMTP server in their architecture.

      source