• vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    18 hours ago

    For the purpose of “shoot a message, go offline and be certain it’s sent” it’s the same service.

    • Jean-luc Peak-hard@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 hours ago

      If sending a message is the only requirement, email fits the bill and has worked for half a century. If we’re being real, the reason Signal “can’t do what Telegram does” is because Telegram doesn’t even attempt to do what Signal does. Signal is tackling a much bigger problem.

      • vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        What are you talking about?

        I’m saying that the parts of infrastructure needed to accept a message to the service from the client application, encrypted or not, associated to a user or not, are under same requirements for Signal and Telegram.

        I don’t know if you understand that every big service is basically its own 90s’ Internet self-contained, and what accepts your messages is pretty similar to an SMTP server in their architecture.