<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>cshg</author><text>Signal&amp;#x27;s by default e2e encrypted chats can be used across platforms, e.g. synced across desktop and mobile.
Telegram&amp;#x27;s secret chats are only available on the device where you initiated them. That&amp;#x27;s a major disadvantage.</text><parent_chain><item><author>skrowl</author><text>Telegram is just so much more usable than Signal.&lt;p&gt;The perceived advantage of Signal over Telegram is LITERALLY not having an option for a cloud-synced chat and ONLY having end to end encrypted chats.  That&amp;#x27;s all.&lt;p&gt;You give up of usability to get that advantage. Explain to your mom why she has to give up Telegram to get basically the same functionality as Telegram secret chats.&lt;p&gt;Signals crypto is used by Facebook and was sponsored by the US Govt.  Before you believe &amp;quot;OMG Telegram crypto is bad!&amp;quot; FUD, do 15 minutes of research.</text></item><item><author>simias</author><text>I definitely agree with the article that it felt a bit like a betrayal. I&amp;#x27;ve pushed some friends and family to use it over Telegram despite significant usability issue, and now I see that instead of implementing some IMO basic features like proper message sync and easy backup when you get a new phone, they prefer to implement a... micropayment system? Based on some niche altcoin which doesn&amp;#x27;t even exist on mainstream exchanges?&lt;p&gt;It goes beyond the usual issue with cryptocurrencies. Let&amp;#x27;s assume that they integrated with Bitcoin or Litecoin or some &amp;quot;mainstream&amp;quot; CC, would it still be a good idea? You can already send wallet addresses over signal if you care to do it.&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;m willing to give the Signal devs the benefit of the doubt and assume that they meant well and aren&amp;#x27;t actively trying to benefit from the move (even though I&amp;#x27;m not completely dismissing this possibility) but at the very least it&amp;#x27;s just showcases a very strange way to lead the project and prioritize issues. I can think of a dozen things out of the top that would do more to drive Signal adoption than integrating with some &amp;quot;literally what?&amp;quot; cryptocoin.&lt;p&gt;This is going to drive the adoption of this niche cryptocoin, it&amp;#x27;s not going to do anything at all for Signal.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Et Tu, Signal?</title><url>https://www.stephendiehl.com/blog/signal.html</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>approxim8ion</author><text>That&amp;#x27;s a big advantage, and a very important one. But definitely, that and the superior crypto is what keeps me on the app. Telegram is in a whole different level when it comes to usability and refinement.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt;Signals crypto is used by Facebook and was sponsored by the US Govt&lt;p&gt;Funny that you&amp;#x27;re talking about FUD.</text><parent_chain><item><author>skrowl</author><text>Telegram is just so much more usable than Signal.&lt;p&gt;The perceived advantage of Signal over Telegram is LITERALLY not having an option for a cloud-synced chat and ONLY having end to end encrypted chats.  That&amp;#x27;s all.&lt;p&gt;You give up of usability to get that advantage. Explain to your mom why she has to give up Telegram to get basically the same functionality as Telegram secret chats.&lt;p&gt;Signals crypto is used by Facebook and was sponsored by the US Govt.  Before you believe &amp;quot;OMG Telegram crypto is bad!&amp;quot; FUD, do 15 minutes of research.</text></item><item><author>simias</author><text>I definitely agree with the article that it felt a bit like a betrayal. I&amp;#x27;ve pushed some friends and family to use it over Telegram despite significant usability issue, and now I see that instead of implementing some IMO basic features like proper message sync and easy backup when you get a new phone, they prefer to implement a... micropayment system? Based on some niche altcoin which doesn&amp;#x27;t even exist on mainstream exchanges?&lt;p&gt;It goes beyond the usual issue with cryptocurrencies. Let&amp;#x27;s assume that they integrated with Bitcoin or Litecoin or some &amp;quot;mainstream&amp;quot; CC, would it still be a good idea? You can already send wallet addresses over signal if you care to do it.&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;m willing to give the Signal devs the benefit of the doubt and assume that they meant well and aren&amp;#x27;t actively trying to benefit from the move (even though I&amp;#x27;m not completely dismissing this possibility) but at the very least it&amp;#x27;s just showcases a very strange way to lead the project and prioritize issues. I can think of a dozen things out of the top that would do more to drive Signal adoption than integrating with some &amp;quot;literally what?&amp;quot; cryptocoin.&lt;p&gt;This is going to drive the adoption of this niche cryptocoin, it&amp;#x27;s not going to do anything at all for Signal.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Et Tu, Signal?</title><url>https://www.stephendiehl.com/blog/signal.html</url></story>