I think it's reasonable to critique the fact that OWS has received $100mm and I can't even add all my devices to my account (they limit it to 4 or 5, iMessage permits at least 10), or add any other phones (only tablet and desktop can be linked).
Being an asshole is unwarranted, but oftentimes one wonders where the money is going with that group. Their production is certainly behind reasonable expectations. We have stickers but not backup, we have some SGX thing for safe server contacts but video calls on desktop are still basically broken/unusable.
For that kind of cash they should have a lot more to show.
Have you got links to any complaints about how OWS is being run by the people donating money to them? (At least for non-troll sized donations. Sending them $5 by PayPal then claiming the right to define and prioritise their roadmap doesn't count.)
I'm not sure you are displaying "reasonable expectations" here, nor that your opinion on how much they should have "to show" carries much weight.
As always, you're welcome to 100% of your money back on your purchase of Signal and it's services if you don't like the product.
It's reasonable to criticize waste even if the waste isn't of my resources.
It's reasonable to criticize and editorialize even over squandered opportunity, something that is (in the case of such criticism) always someone else's, not your own.
I can reasonably think they're doing a mediocre job, given the circumstance that they received $100mm, even if it's not a dime of my money.
I think this attitude reflects much more on your misplaced understanding of what OWS are doing and why, rather than anything meaningful about your critizisms.
It's a _really_ poor proxy for most things, but they're the ones with $100mm of somebody else money. I suspect your opinion that they're "wasting" any of that is much more likely to be that you don't understand the goals, rather than the people behind _that_ much money letting it be "wasted".
You've demonstrated very little understanding of the reasons behind the problems you cite. Do you know the tradeoffs behind the decision to limit linked devices? Do you think OWS's priority on desktop video call quality is the same as yours, and do you know the tradeoffs they're making by choosing not to prioritise that? You pretty much admit you have zero clue how or why they're using SGX - which is one of that most innovative privacy techniques in the entire space (it's not perfect, but it's about as diametrically opposed to how Facebook et al do contact discovery as it's possible to get).
[Edit: It's also possible _my_ understanding of what Moxie and OWS are trying to do is wrong, and I'm crediting them for or at least giving them a pass on a lot of stuff based on that. But I don't think so. I've been reading their blog since they worked on an Android app called TextSecure back in 2014 or so. Moxie is a friend of a friend, and I'd eaten and drunk with him. I think I have a reasonable understanding, for an outsider, of what is important to them and why they're doing the things they do.]
I am quite familiar with all of the things you asked about, including the SGX server attestation stuff. I glossed over it for the sake of comment brevity; I browse HN comments on mobile and reply with thumbs.
I know their tradeoffs well; I also know the SF rumors I hear about the fate of their money.
I think they should have quite a bit more to show for it.
> As always, you're welcome to 100% of your money back on your purchase of Signal and it's services if you don't like the product.
When it becomes possible to change this to “100% of your time back”, I’ll be able to agree with such sentiments. Users invest time that they cannot get back.
Being an asshole is unwarranted, but oftentimes one wonders where the money is going with that group. Their production is certainly behind reasonable expectations. We have stickers but not backup, we have some SGX thing for safe server contacts but video calls on desktop are still basically broken/unusable.
For that kind of cash they should have a lot more to show.