Just because it’s built on a block chain doesn’t mean they relinquished control and decentralized it. But it’s a platform that allows you to decentralize.
Is this worth it as an upgrade to our existing centrally controlled currency? That’s a different discussion.
Does it solve the problem blockchain provides a solution for? Does it allow for decentralization? It appears the answer is no.
There’s a difference between saying “the secure enclave holds the biometric data securely and locally in a verifiable way with no mechanism to retrieve the actual data” and “trust them, don’t worry about it”
It’s okay to be wrong.
They are overlapping areas, but they are “two completely different things”. They overlap by sharing common goals, not by being interchangeable.
Anonymity to me means the message recipient can’t tell who you are.
Right. And Signal doesn’t provide that at all, it ties your private messages to your identity (phone number), it explicitly does not provide anonymity. In fact, it proudly advertises you as a signal user to other signal users that have your number saved. It allows you to post public status updates, it encourages you to save your first and last name on your account.
If a THIRD PARTY (the server operator) can ALSO tell who you are, that’s a privacy failure, not just an anonymity one.
Okay? And? In this hypothetical world where Signal offered anonymity but still tied you to your number for other practical reasons, then you’re be correct that it would be a privacy concern.
But they don’t offer anonymity, they offer private conversations.
If you don’t think centralized currency controlled by neo-liberal capitalist states isn’t a problem to solve, we aren’t even in the same plane here.