>>/99/
I doubt that LibreSignal is of any importance at all. Signal without the Google dependence is still shit.
> LibreSignal was using the Signal servers, consuming their energy, and using their marketing.
If you care for free software then you must not exclude alternative implementations, otherwise you'd have to implement some form of DRM.
> moxie: I'm not OK with LibreSignal using our servers, and I'm not OK with LibreSignal using the name "Signal." You're free to use our source code for whatever you would like under the terms of the license, but you're not entitled to use our name or the service that we run.
There is not much to say about this.
Generally any attempts to provide secure applications are futile as long as the underlying OS is non-free.
Yet the Signal devs claim that their app is working correctly on IOs and Android without any caveat. Third parties like Micah Lee (EFF, TheIntercept) shill for Signal as well, exactly repeating claims like that.
In short they basically say that free-software is not mandatory for security. Moreover they even claim that Android and IOs are secure operating systems.
> Is Signal a threat to Free Software?
Signal is a threat but also completely insignificant. It doesn't solve any problems, the devs only want you to believe so. Also there are alternatives that actually work since ages.
tl;dr:
>>/101/
> Signal is like tox: shit and made by fucking faggots.