[woobilicious]

Signals protocol is designed so you don't have to trust the server.

Just look at how much information they hand over to the feds:

https://signal.org/bigbrother/cd-california-grand-jury/

I'm not sure what you mean by walled garden, but I assume you mean that you can't setup your own servers and join the network? What's stopping a federated network from forming a cartel and blocking small players, or servers they deem morally objectionable?

[godelski]

By walled garden I think they mean the servers. Because the app isn't a walled garden. It is open source though centralized (Moxie has argued extensively about how this allows faster development. Though ironically Signal is known for slow development). But the servers are also open sourced so there's nothing stopping people from creating private (or even federated) "Signal" apps. You just couldn't call it Signal in name. And I don't blame Signal for keeping their servers to themselves. They're not a data center and already running a tight ship.

I've never really understood the argument. Just because someone hasn't done something doesn't mean it is a walled garden.

[goodpoint]

Not only Signal refuses to have any 3rd party server federate with theirs, but they also refuse 3rd party clients. This is exactly the definition of walled garden.

[godelski]

There's also risk to letting others host servers. We know about bad tor nodes. Federation doesn't solve the problem you're looking to solve

[goodpoint]

> Signals protocol is designed so you don't have to trust the server.

That's not true, see the other reply.