pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 8 replies \ @Solomonsatoshi 25 Sep \ on: Exposing the flaws in the mobile network system conspiracy
Why not use Tox?
Free Open Source and More Decentralised and Secure than SimpleX.
A quick query using the AI from Brave offers some light on it, not familiar with TOX, but according to this answer there is a good reason why Libertarians and Bitcoiners alike are turning into SimpleX and not TOX. (If accurate...)
Tox and SimpleX Chat are both decentralized, open-source, and end-to-end encrypted messaging platforms. While they share some similarities, they differ in their architecture, features, and design goals. Tox is a peer-to-peer (P2P) network with a focus on file sharing and group chat, whereas SimpleX Chat is a decentralized messaging protocol with a focus on user privacy and metadata protection.
Encryption Features Comparison
| Feature | Tox | SimpleX Chat |
|---|---|---|
| End-to-End Encryption | Yes, using AES-256 and ECIES | Yes, using AES-256 and Curve25519 |
| Key Exchange | Public-key cryptography (ECDSA) | Public-key cryptography (Curve25519) |
| Message Authentication | HMAC-SHA256 | HMAC-SHA256 |
| Perfect Forward Secrecy | Yes | Yes |
| Serverless Architecture | No, uses a central node | Yes, fully decentralized |
| User IDs | Yes | No, uses ephemeral identifiers |
Pros and Cons
Tox
Pros:
Supports file sharing and group chat
Decentralized network with multiple nodes
Open-source and community-driven
Cons:
Central node can be a single point of failure
Limited scalability compared to SimpleX Chat
User IDs can be used for tracking and profiling
SimpleX Chat
Pros:
Fully decentralized with no central server
Ephemeral identifiers prevent user tracking and profiling
Scalable architecture with low overhead
Open-source and transparent
Cons:
Limited features compared to Tox (no file sharing, no group chat)
Steeper learning curve due to its unique architecture
Table
| Tox | SimpleX Chat | |
|---|---|---|
| End-to-End Encryption | ✅ | ✅ |
| Decentralization | Partial (central node) | Full (no central server) |
| User IDs | ✅ | ❌ |
| File Sharing | ✅ | ✅ |
| Group Chat | ✅ | ✅ |
| Scalability | ❌ | ✅ |
| Transparency | ✅ | ✅ |
| Open-source | ✅ | ✅ |
Note: The table uses ✅ to indicate a feature is present and ❌ to indicate it is not.
reply
In the wiki comparison above Tox is described as being serverless while SimpleX is described as being reliant upon a centralised server.
In the wiki comparison Tox has all the desirable attributes (in terms of privacy and utility) while SimpleX has most but not all.
reply
I do not see Wikipedia as a serious source for anything.
Check SimpleX web site and decide by yourself, I will check TOX for sure, thanks for sharing either way, SimpleX works for me so far, if TOX is better that is a bonus
reply
I would see Wikipedia as a more neutral source than SimpleX website.
reply
reply
Wikipedia biased how?
reply
Well, if you have to ask it means you have a lot of research to do, I give you a few pointers:
Here a study published by Larry Sanger, co-founder of Wikipedia:
Last bug not least, Wikipedia have been infiltrated at all levels , not only at ideological level but at corporate level with a massive bias to push for their donors commercial interest, I personally had to deal with that years ago, it was amusing to corroborate personally what many where already exposing.
Yet, a large amount of the population keep looking at Wikipedia as a good source of information...
It is so bad, that when I use AI language models I explicitly request the model to remove Wikipedia as a source of information...
reply