• vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      19 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
        ·
        10 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
          ·
          2 hours 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.