• Nima@leminal.space
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    15 hours ago

    using the phone number is still a pretty unnecessary risk, imho.

    there’s no real need for it any longer.

    • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      15 hours ago

      Do you have a better approach to prevent spam in mind? Without a barrier of entry it becomes a serious issue.

      • Nima@leminal.space
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        13 hours ago

        Spam prevention? Ive got spam on Signal. Having your phone number be the barrier of entry doesn’t make Signal a flawless app.

        and considering i can just plug a google voice number in, I’m not sure its the best barrier.

        • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 hours ago

          Spam isn’t a binary issue, where it either exists or doesn’t. It could very well be the case that, without requiring a phone number, there’d be far more spam (since it’d be far easier to automatically create new accounts).

          Again, do you have a better suggestion for spam & abuse prevention?

          And still, aside from that - it doesn’t really make sense to expect Signal to offer SMS integration just because it requires a phone number for spam prevention, when offering this integration would be detrimental towards the mission of Signal (offering secure messages).