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.

  • poVoq@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    6 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
      ·
      6 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 😁

      • poVoq@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 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
          ·
          6 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
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 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.

  • ride@monero.town
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    Top-Tec! decentralized and doesn’t depend on any unique identifiers

  • fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    “Hang on let me write down my QR code”

    Usernames exist for a reason, especially in chat apps. Not having usernames is only going to severely limit your target demographic. And if nobody uses your app does it’s benefits even matter?

  • rrobin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    Here is my take as someone who absolutely loves the work simplex did on the SMP protocol, but still does not use SimpleX Chat.

    First the trivial stuff:

    1. no one else seems to use it
    2. UX is not great because of initial exchange

    These two are not that unexpected. Any other chat app with E2E security has tricky UX, and SimpleX takes the hard road by not trading off security/privacy for UX. I think this is a plus, but yes it annoys people.

    Now for the reasons that really keep me away:

    1. the desktop app is way behind the mobile app - and I would really prefer to use a desktop CLI app
    2. haskell puts me off a bit - the language is fine I just don’t know how to read it - for more practical issues it did not support older (arm6/7) devices which kept lots of people in older devices away
    3. AFAIK no alternative implementations of either the client or the SMP server exist - which is a petty I think the protocol would shine in other contexts (like push notifications)
    4. I was going to say that there are not many 3rd party user groups - but I just found out about the directory service (shame on me, maybe? can’t seem to find groups though)
    5. protocol features/stabilization is a moving target and most of the fancy new features don’t really interest me (i don’t care much about audio/video)
    6. stabilization of code/dependencies would help package the server/client in more linux distros, which I think would help adoption among the tech folk

    Finally a couple of points on some of the other comments:

    • multi device support - no protocol out there can do multi device properly (not signal, none really) so i’m ok with biting the bullet on this
    • VC funding is a drag - but I am still thankful that they clearly specified the chat protocol separate from the message relay, which means that even if the chat app dies, SMP could still be used for other stuff.
      • taladar@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Ah, must have missed that one, though

        Using the same profile as on mobile device is not yet supported – you need to create a separate profile to use desktop apps.

        is a pretty major downside.

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

            But wouldn’t that mean if someone writes to your desktop profile you can’t respond on mobile and vice versa? And you would have to be added by everyone else twice too?

            • starlord@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              You just never use a desktop profile. You have an account on mobile, and every time you go desktop you sign in with the app and qr code so you’re always using the same db on each machine.

              My desktop app has zero profiles and no db; I only sign in with my mobile.

      • telep@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 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.

  • aldalire@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 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
      1
      ·
      6 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.

    • 7heo@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 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.
      • merde alors@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 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
          ·
          6 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
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 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

    • Em Adespoton@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 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.