Keychat's avatar
Keychat 7 months ago
It’s sad to see Simplex fall into the tempting smart-contract blockchain token trap. This is also why Keychat uses ecash sats as postage stamps for messages.

Replies (21)

So read the website for more information but yeah I tried to tell them this wasn't good but they don't care. The only thing that cares is it offers L2 protocol which ensures anonymous payments. Whatever bs explanation. It's all to ensure their own vouchers can be used only on simplex between server operators.
water783's avatar
water783 7 months ago
Building a FOSS chat app isn’t easy — it takes a ton of time, effort, and resources. Simplex probably went down that token route just to cover costs. Keychat, on the other hand, is trying something interesting — using ecash sats as postage stamps for messages. And then there’s 0xchat & XChat — we don’t have any monetization model, but we’ve been lucky to get steady grant support from @OpenSats , which helps us keep building and moving forward. View quoted note →
This is demonstrably wrong. Ethereum, for example, had a 70% pre-mine that went into the pockets of the very few. That's the opposite of neutral and incredibly immoral. image
SatsAndSports's avatar
SatsAndSports 7 months ago
And it's not even that difficult to build good bitcoin support into a chat app. I'm a relative noob to privacy tech and - thanks to good existing libraries and AI assistance - I was able to make a chat app with a cashu wallet built-in, using the MDK (Marmot Development Kit) for MLS chat. I don't expect to continue on my project, it was just a fun project to get to know the libraries, and to learn how things like push notifications work and to learn more about MLS. I hadn't heard of Keychat, I'll check it out now!
None of them are solved with another token... 😂 Like, you could just make your own secure server. Why blockchain? Oh "decentralized" The only thing in crypto that is really decentralized is Bitcoin. Everything else is unnecessary. And Bitcoin is terrible to use for arbitrary data. It's slow AF. And you need external software to even index it in the first place and it's terribly expensive. So they go oh well we can make a blockchain that is better in all those areas. Then you lose the decentralization. So there's no point to a blockchain. You're literally just adding a while host of complexity that has as much security as your own internal centralized server anyways. Any thought at all from a first principal perspective would exemplify this. So the choices are 9/10 they're just going to rug their coins slowly to zero and make money doing it and go away. Or 1/10 they're just dumb and didn't think about this logically 10/10 chances it will end the company and the protocol within a decade.