SimpleX Chat is an instant messenger that is decentralized and doesn’t depend on any unique identifiers such as phone numbers or usernames. Users of SimpleX Chat can scan a QR code or click an invite link to participate in group conversations.

-privacyguides.org

It’s clearly proving to be the most innovative technology when it comes to decentralized communication, in my opinion.

      • merde alors@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        i don’t know in what world you’re living, but in this world where people think you’re (edit: we are) a pain in the ass for refusing to install WhatsApp when everyone is expected to use it for official communication (work + organizations); Signal is great.

        I’ve convinced a couple of dozens of people to use Signal, and only one to keep Simplex as, at least, a backup.

        as a caring-about-privacy minority we can invite “them” to Signal. “They” know Signal and Telegram👎. “They” understand our concerns. “They” for whatever incomprehensible reason keep using WhatsApp 🤷 We’re left out of the loop because once “everyone” is on that WhatsApp group, it’s tiring for them to send an email or an sms to the exceptional one or two people

        • jack@monero.town
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          What are you talking about? Your comment isn’t relevant at all. Next time read more carefully

          • merde alors@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            it is relevant.

            requiring phone number and being centralized doesn’t make Signal “not great” in a world where a great majority of people use WhatsApp + read the last comment again but more carefully ;)

            signal is a great alternative to a WhatsApp world. Simplex or Session has no chance with the general public

  • poVoq@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    SimpleX Chat Ltd is a seed stage startup with a lot of user growth in 2022-2023, and a lot of exciting technical and product problems to solve to grow faster.

    Run by a VC funded for-profit company. That really should tell you all you need to know. Sorry, but no thanks.

    • Scolding0513@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      this is a wrong take for a few reasons, if we’re talking about trust.

      Also, Signal literally was taking money from the CIA for a decade and also is based in the US anyway, and no one hardly said a word 🤣🤣 “Privacy” activists are a joke lmao. Also signal made a crypto coin and took away features like SMS, but of course they get a free pass for that too. Makes you wonder.

      1. SimpleX is fully open source, verifiable, and audited. If there are changes that are bad, the community will talk about them, and at worst it can be forked

      2. SimpleX has made it clear that they dont want you to trust them. It’s decentralised and anyone can run their own relay, and the servers are designed prevent correlation. They also make it very easy to use TOR and multiple circuits. This is contrary to the inferior Signal model where you just have to trust that the centralized Signal org isnt leaking your phone and IP to the feds.

      moving towards a decentralised, open, and trustless world is better for everyone. In this kind of system, I really dont give a damn where they are getting their money from, as long as they arent putting crap in the software, and if they do, we will all know about it. But so far they have shown that they are committed to extreme security and privacy, and they obviously arent trying to appeal to normies, so i doubt they would ever even try to put VC-pushed garbage in.

      If you want a good app, you will need funding from somewhere. Look at apps like Session that arent funded well. They suck. So I’d rather SimpleX be funded by a VC instead of by the feds like Signal, as long as everything stays open, free, trustless, and decentralised

      Time to get downvoted! See you guys at -50 😁

      • uzi@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        I’m in full agreement with you. Not even a little bit of disagreement.

      • poVoq@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Where did I even mention Signal? Total strawman argument, as I don’t think Signal is a good option either.

        But you go ahead and trust Simplex Chat Ltd. I guess some people only learn from their own mistakes 🤷‍♂️

        • Scolding0513@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          you completely ignored what i said, as I specifically argued that simplex is made to be used without trust. so dont talk about me trusting people lol.

          Also I agree with you on Signal, was just throwing it out there for others, not necessarily for you.

          • poVoq@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            You walked right into my deliberate rethorical trap 😅

            There is no such thing as trustless computing, and anyone that tries to sell you that is scamming you or drank the same kool-aid.

      • SolarPunker@slrpnk.netOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Exactly what I thought; if the technology is so decentralized does it make sense to care so much about who finances the project? Like if one instance of lemmy was funded by Microsoft, we could easily use another one and block it, right?

    • FarraigePlaisteach@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Upvoted bc VC eventually means enshittifiication. But with xz getting back-doored recently, what is the middle ground that keeps these things sustainable financially and operationally?

      • Kidplayer_666@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Maybe it’ll be governments partially funding it. If Schleswig-Holstein’s attempt is anything to go by, it might be a way

          • taladar@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            As opposed to whom? Are investors in VC startups less compromised or more? What are the incentives in either case? Who do you trust to be competent and/or incompetent enough to compromise it without you noticing it? Who is likely to change a project that was well intentioned first after the fact? In what ways?

          • Kidplayer_666@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            You have 4 basic options for funding:

            -you rely on individual donations which doesn’t bring in enough money

            -you force people to pay for it, which makes it less attractive when compared to traditional software, and makes much of the community pissy

            -you rely on corporate money

            -you rely on government money

            None is perfect, but some amount of government funding (let’s say, 10% of what they would pay Microsoft for the equivalent software) might make sense

  • lemmyreader@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Interesting project, but last time I tried it was battery hungry, and having made quite an effort to get some of my contacts on Signal, I don’t see it happen to get them all on SimpleXChat. And Signal Stickers make Signal more attractive for some.

    • Em Adespoton@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      I saw a user’s hash just this week — it was in a ransom note. They required their victims to sign up for the service and text a code to their userhash to kick off sending the attacker cryptocurrency so they’d send a decryption key and not make stolen data public.

      Other than that use case, it hasn’t picked up many users that I’m aware of.

  • aldalire@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Session messenger allows you to chat without linking a phone number to your account. It’s what drug dealers use lol.

    • EngineerGaming@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      What really bothers me about Session is that you effectively cannot selfhost - hosting a node is prohibitively expensive. So seems like the only people who can realistically host a node are crypto bros, big companies and government agencies. Thanks, I would rather stick with IRC/XMPP/Matrix.

      • telep@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        unified push works as a stand in for gms on devices without it. it runs in the background & receive the wakeup pings for the apps (in this case simplex) so you only need one websocket open instead of a different background service for each app. hugely reduces battery use.

        • delirious_owl@discuss.online
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          Does that work without google services? I thought this was why signal said they wouldn’t remove gapps depends, and all privacy apps do pull instead of push?

  • IuseArchbtw@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    I’d definitely use it if my friends were using it. Sadly, I can’t even get them to use signal.

    • LazaroFilm@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Find better friends. I say that but my friends decided to leave Facebook Messenger group chat… for Instagram. Now they use both.

    • fluckx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Same… Sigh…

      I don’t need people to be hyper-privacy minded. But just a little bit at least. I’m not expecting everybody to self host a matrix server and use element and run self hosted services on their own RPI.

      But just not pick one of the worst ones?

  • Gravitywell@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    I don’t trust for profit venture capital funding, if you want to see where it ends up just Look at how telegram or wickr transitions from being “open” and free to getting stripped of features only to have them become paid only and the wickr sold off to Amazon and ended all non business support…the business model for making a profit off chat applications is bad for users.

    Also now that signal supports usernames I have no reason to use anything else even for people I wouldn’t want having my real number.

  • LemmyHead@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    I think it’s just that there are too many options and the communities are so fragmented. I’m trying out simplex but it still feels like beta software. Regardless I’d like to see it succeed so we have a real private alternative that doesn’t rely on big tech of shady government sponsorship.

    • 7heo@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      https://simplex.chat/blog/20240314-simplex-chat-v5-6-quantum-resistance-signal-double-ratchet-algorithm.html

      messenger-comparison

      ¹ Repudiation in SimpleX Chat will include client-server protocol from v5.7 or v5.8. Currently it is implemented but not enabled yet, as its support requires releasing the relay protocol that breaks backward compatibility.

      ² Post-quantum cryptography is available in beta version, as opt-in only for direct conversations. See below how it will be rolled-out further.

      Some columns are marked with a yellow checkmark:

      • when messages are padded, but not to a fixed size.
      • when repudiation does not include client-server connection. In case of Cwtch it appears that the presence of cryptographic signatures compromises repudiation (deniability), but it needs to be clarified.
      • when 2-factor key exchange is optional (via security code verification).
      • when post-quantum cryptography is only added to the initial key agreement and does not protect break-in recovery.
  • GadgeteerZA@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    @SolarPunker@slrpnk.net I’ve not heard of anyone who does “not like” it? Many don’t know about it maybe. I can’t think of anything I’ve seen against it as it ticks most of the boxes for excellent privacy and has been very usable for me.

    • Gooey0210@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Me, my friends, and family are using it

      Aaand… Everyone is hating it, tbh 🤣

      The notifications are unreliable and at the same time it drains 20% of the battery

      Waiting for fixes, also want to setup my own relay

  • ThinkingThings@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Simple answer to the question so far as I can see: in order to connect with someone, you have to video conference with them and show them a code. So the anonymity is only as anonymous as the video conference you use to do that. All of the benefits it claims are merely an illusion.

    • jack@monero.town
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Just send them the code. It’s okay if the channel over which they the receive the code is insecure