đŁTHREAD: Itâs surprising to me that so many people were surprised to learn that Signal runs partly on AWS (something we can do because we use encryption to make sure no one but youânot AWS, not Signal, not anyoneâcan access your comms).
-
THREAD: Itâs surprising to me that so many people were surprised to learn that Signal runs partly on AWS (something we can do because we use encryption to make sure no one but youânot AWS, not Signal, not anyoneâcan access your comms). Itâs also concerning. 1/
-
THREAD: Itâs surprising to me that so many people were surprised to learn that Signal runs partly on AWS (something we can do because we use encryption to make sure no one but youânot AWS, not Signal, not anyoneâcan access your comms).
Itâs also concerning. 1/
Concerning, bc it indicates that the extent of the concentration of power in the hands of a few hyperscalers is way less widely understood than Iâd assumed. Which bodes poorly for our ability to craft reality-based strategies capable of contesting this concentration & solving the real problem. 2/
-
Concerning, bc it indicates that the extent of the concentration of power in the hands of a few hyperscalers is way less widely understood than Iâd assumed. Which bodes poorly for our ability to craft reality-based strategies capable of contesting this concentration & solving the real problem. 2/
The question isnât "why does Signal use AWS?" Itâs to look at the infrastructural requirements of any global, real-time, mass comms platform and ask how it is that we got to a place where thereâs no realistic alternative to AWS and the other hyperscalers. 3/
-
The question isnât "why does Signal use AWS?" Itâs to look at the infrastructural requirements of any global, real-time, mass comms platform and ask how it is that we got to a place where thereâs no realistic alternative to AWS and the other hyperscalers. 3/
Running a low-latency platform for instant comms capable of carrying millions of concurrent audio/video calls requires a pre-built, planet-spanning network of compute, storage and edge presence that requires constant maintenance, significant electricity and persistent attention and monitoring. 4/
-
Running a low-latency platform for instant comms capable of carrying millions of concurrent audio/video calls requires a pre-built, planet-spanning network of compute, storage and edge presence that requires constant maintenance, significant electricity and persistent attention and monitoring. 4/
Instant messaging demands near-zero latency. Voice and video in particular require complex global signaling & regional relays to manage jitter and packet loss. These are things that AWS, Azure, and GCP provide at global scale that, practically speaking, others (in the western context) donât. 5/
-
Instant messaging demands near-zero latency. Voice and video in particular require complex global signaling & regional relays to manage jitter and packet loss. These are things that AWS, Azure, and GCP provide at global scale that, practically speaking, others (in the western context) donât. 5/
This isn't â'renting a server.' It's leasing access to a whole sprawling, capital-intensive, technically-capable system that must be just as available in Cairo as in Capetown, just as functional in Bangkok as Berlin. Particularly given the high stakes use cases of many who rely on Signal. 6/
-
This isn't â'renting a server.' It's leasing access to a whole sprawling, capital-intensive, technically-capable system that must be just as available in Cairo as in Capetown, just as functional in Bangkok as Berlin. Particularly given the high stakes use cases of many who rely on Signal. 6/
Such infrastructure costs billions and billions of dollars to provision and maintain, and itâs highly depreciable. In the case of the hyperscalers, the staggering cost is cross-subsidized by other businessesâthemselves also massive platforms with significant lockin. 7/
-
Such infrastructure costs billions and billions of dollars to provision and maintain, and itâs highly depreciable. In the case of the hyperscalers, the staggering cost is cross-subsidized by other businessesâthemselves also massive platforms with significant lockin. 7/
Meaning that infrastructure like AWS is not something that Signal, or almost anyone else, could afford to just âspin up.â Which is why nearly everyone that manages a real-time serviceâfrom Signal, to X, to Palantir, to Mastodonârely at least in part on services provisioned by these companies. 8/
-
Meaning that infrastructure like AWS is not something that Signal, or almost anyone else, could afford to just âspin up.â Which is why nearly everyone that manages a real-time serviceâfrom Signal, to X, to Palantir, to Mastodonârely at least in part on services provisioned by these companies. 8/
But even if Signal had the billions needed to recreate AWS, itâs not just about money. The talent to run these systems is rare & concentrated. The expertise, the tooling, the playbooks, the very language of modern SRE came out of these hyperscalers, and is now synonymous with 'the cloud.' 9/
-
But even if Signal had the billions needed to recreate AWS, itâs not just about money. The talent to run these systems is rare & concentrated. The expertise, the tooling, the playbooks, the very language of modern SRE came out of these hyperscalers, and is now synonymous with 'the cloud.' 9/
o, yes, Signal runs on AWS. It also runs on your phone, which runs on iOS (Apple) or Android (Google). And on Dekstop, via Windows (Microsoft). Each of these presents similar dependencies on large entrenched tech companies, and concomitant barriers and risks. 10/
-
o, yes, Signal runs on AWS. It also runs on your phone, which runs on iOS (Apple) or Android (Google). And on Dekstop, via Windows (Microsoft). Each of these presents similar dependencies on large entrenched tech companies, and concomitant barriers and risks. 10/
In short, the problem here is not that Signal âchoseâ to run on AWS. The problem is the concentration of power in the infrastructure space that means there isnât really another choice: the entire stack, practically speaking, is owned by 3-4 players. 11/
-
In short, the problem here is not that Signal âchoseâ to run on AWS. The problem is the concentration of power in the infrastructure space that means there isnât really another choice: the entire stack, practically speaking, is owned by 3-4 players. 11/
So, Signal does what we can to provide a service w integrity in the concentrated ecosystem we're working in. We protect your comms w end-to-end encryption, so that we can use AWS and others as a highway across which to send Signal data in ways that donât let AWS, or anyone else, gain access. 12/
-
So, Signal does what we can to provide a service w integrity in the concentrated ecosystem we're working in. We protect your comms w end-to-end encryption, so that we can use AWS and others as a highway across which to send Signal data in ways that donât let AWS, or anyone else, gain access. 12/
To conclude: my silver lining hope is that AWS going down can be a learning moment, in which the risks of concentrating the nervous system of our world in the hands of a few players become very clear. And that this can help us craft ways of undoing this concentration and creating real choice
ď¸ 13/ -
To conclude: my silver lining hope is that AWS going down can be a learning moment, in which the risks of concentrating the nervous system of our world in the hands of a few players become very clear. And that this can help us craft ways of undoing this concentration and creating real choice
ď¸ 13/The tor network has had 100% uptime. 100%
-
The tor network has had 100% uptime. 100%
@yawnbox I don't think you have a clear understanding of what you're talking about, and it might be fun for you to look a bit more deeply into how TOR works and its dependencies.
-
M malte@radikal.social shared this topic
-
@yawnbox I don't think you have a clear understanding of what you're talking about, and it might be fun for you to look a bit more deeply into how TOR works and its dependencies.
With respect Meredith, iâm talking about decentralized protocols and their capability to not depend so heavily on the service providers youâre arguing for. Tor Project has shown how possible it is (i used to work there, and itâs spelled Tor not TOR).
I listened to Moxieâs aversions to decentralization for years. Thatâs what I keep seeing now, with posts like these. I also understand the value of huge cloud providers, Iâve worked for many companies who use them, and have worked for them, and I understand why you depend on them and how important that is to a high quality service. Thank you for all that you all do.
But what conversations does Signal Foundation actually have on the topics of resiliency through decentralization? How much money could you save by allowing the community to take on aspects of the network? How much resiliency and trust could be gained, without losing performance?
-
THREAD: Itâs surprising to me that so many people were surprised to learn that Signal runs partly on AWS (something we can do because we use encryption to make sure no one but youânot AWS, not Signal, not anyoneâcan access your comms).
Itâs also concerning. 1/
@Mer__edith Thank you for laying this out and continuing to school us. What do you think is the major first solution to end this concentration in computing power - anti-monopoly reforms?
-
J jwcph@helvede.net shared this topic
P pelle@veganism.social shared this topic
