There is no reason to assume that based on the fact that they do not posess any information on their servers that would not be available to authorities anyway. You are making up nonesense based on your own delusions.

You clearly have no clue how the internet or signal works. There is no information on signal servers that arent already available through the telcos, litterally zero

More baseless nonsense

Your claim about it being a honey pot is entirely baseless. There is a significantly better chance you are working for the US to prevent people from using signal…

Funded by the US? Well thats the entire internet, including Tor, Linux and Matrix…

Amazing how much BS is spread here

The only relevant part is the client, which as always been open source.

Funded by the US? Well thats the entire internet, including Tor, Linux and Matrix…

Amazing how much BS is spread here

Most security experts who actually know what they are talking about do recommend Signal for most users, including [https://twitter.com/Snowden/status/661313394906161152](Edward Snowden), [https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2018/06/russian_censors.html] (Bruce Schneier) and [https://linktr.ee/glenngreenwald](Glenn Greenwald). Eveyone should consider whether they would rather follow the advise of people who have literally fought the NSA and read the entire Snowden documents or belive in the FUD spread by some people here.

The entire protocol is build under the assumption that you do not need to trust the servers. Let the NSA have then, it doesnt matter. On the other hand 95% of Matrix users are hosted on Matrix.org which was not only hacked several times, but would be an ideal target for any agency to compromise. Its naiive to belive the big Matrix hosts arent compromised. The only effective defense is to build your system aroudn the assumption that the server is compromised, which si what Signal did.

All decentralized protocols have this issue. The servers need to handle metadata for chat groups, like who is part of which group. If the servers are under individual control, nobody can force them to delete this data. The question is, do you trust a non profit organisation like signal to minimize and delete metadata (which court orders have proven they do) or do you trust all individuals of a group chat to do the same when you manually ask them to.

Matrix is the worst option when it comes to avoiding metadata. A group chat with users on 10 different servers will create ten different places to store the metadata with no way for any user to delete or edit this metadata. Its a privacy nightmare.

Nobody forces you to use it. A manual arch install is still one of the most valuable leassons I learned when I started using this OS and nothing keeps new users from doing the same today

This is the same discussion as with learning programming languages. In the us, most universities start with python, to make to easy by avaoiding memory management. In Europe, most universities start with C and C++ to teach the basics to the core. Both approaches can be appropriate depending on the student.

Lazygit

Thats pretty good, thanks.

I would recommend Arch, but only to users who want to learn and understand linux and have the time to do so.

Git - the Github Desktop application is a great example of how easy git could be for users like me who only rarely use git. Every time I need to do somethign other then a simple pull or push I need to look it up and by the time I need it again I have forgotten the command and need to look it up again. Just give me something like Github Desktop on linux

Before Github, there was no collection of open source repositories that are easily searchable, making it easy to find and promote open source software. I am not aware of any alternative that ever did or does a better job at making open source contributions that easy. Even when I try to use codeberg as an alternative, my Github repos will always get more contributions. No idea how we could even begin to change that.