Spam prevention

Bots. If it makes you feel better, you can disable other people finding you via phone number and just give them your username. All messages are private.

Everything is a balancing act. Privacy, anonymity, and security aren't the same things. They're sometimes, and in some aspects always, difficult to achieve without compromising one of the other two.

When you add in the goal of quick, easy setup to make the service useful in the first place. Doesn't matter how good the service is at the trinity if nobody is willing to use it. Signal just errs on security first, privacy second, anonymity third.

There is a lot of FUD here. It's just like anti-vaxxers claiming vaccines make you autistic or have microchips in them: they don't understand what they're talking about, have different threat models, and are paranoid.

Messages are private on signal and they cannot be connected to you through sealed sender. There have been multiple audits and even government requests for information which have returned only the phone number and last connection time.

Anti Commercial-AI license

One of the design goals is that they don't have a user database, so governments etc can't knock down their door demanding anything. By using phone numbers your "contacts" are not on their servers but local on your phone.

SimpleX is coming nicely along. Should be good to switch next year once they got their desktop apps polished up

Signal is not perfect but we control its app, libre software. See SimpleX Chat.

Escaping WhatsApp and Discord, anti-libre software, is more important.

Jami.net

Ignore the comment saying signal is "end to end encrypted" "private" etc They are simply stuck in a delusional state where they try to convince themselves that signal is the best option so they can continue using it. Nothing is private if it isn't fully libre because you never know what the proprietary code is doing. The signal protocol itself has its source code released, and the encryption and security code is publicly available, but the signal Foundation has stated that it uses both free code and proprietary code. Their reason is UI, but it's hard to make sure whatever proprietary code is being used for because you simply can't see it. As GNU puts it: "You're walking in a pitch black cave". Jami is fully libre and is a GNU project. You don't even need any phone number!

If you want to be mainstream a) you can't have spammers, scammers, and all the other scum of the earth and b) finding your contacts in the app HAVE TO be plug and play. Literally no normie will bother adding with usernames or whatever.

It's focused on ensuring there is no middleman between you and the other party, but it does not have a goal to provide anonymous messaging. Sadly.

Maybe I am being too simplistic here. But I have never received a spam message to my XMPP account and I don't know how a spammer would find it.

In a phone-based system a spammer can spam a list of numbers, or use contact lists that are easily shared via phone permissions. There are several low-effort discovery processes.

For e-mail, you get spam when you you input your personal e-mail into forms, websites, or post it publicly.

But for something like XMPP... It seems rather difficult to discover accounts effectively to spam them. And, if it is an actual problem, why not implement some kind of 'identity swap' that automatically transmits a new identity to approved contacts? A chat username does not need to be as static as an e-mail or a phone number for most people.

I just don't see 'spam' as such a difficult challenge in this context, and not enough in my view to balance out requesting a phone number. Perhaps a spammer can chip-in?