this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2023
939 points (98.5% liked)

Technology

59657 readers
2710 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Signal’s president reveals the cost of running the privacy-preserving platform—not just to drum up donations, but to call out the for-profit surveillance business models it competes against.

The encrypted messaging and calling app Signal has become a one-of-a-kind phenomenon in the tech world: It has grown from the preferred encrypted messenger for the paranoid privacy elite into a legitimately mainstream service with hundreds of millions of installs worldwide. And it has done this entirely as a nonprofit effort, with no venture capital or monetization model, all while holding its own against the best-funded Silicon Valley competitors in the world, like WhatsApp, Facebook Messenger, Gmail, and iMessage.

Today, Signal is revealing something about what it takes to pull that off—and it’s not cheap. For the first time, the Signal Foundation that runs the app has published a full breakdown of Signal’s operating costs: around $40 million this year, projected to hit $50 million by 2025.

Signal’s president, Meredith Whittaker, says her decision to publish the detailed cost numbers in a blog post for the first time—going well beyond the IRS disclosures legally required of nonprofits—was more than just as a frank appeal for year-end donations. By revealing the price of operating a modern communications service, she says, she wanted to call attention to how competitors pay these same expenses: either by profiting directly from monetizing users’ data or, she argues, by locking users into networks that very often operate with that same corporate surveillance business model.

“By being honest about these costs ourselves, we believe that helps provide a view of the engine of the tech industry, the surveillance business model, that is not always apparent to people,” Whittaker tells WIRED. Running a service like Signal—or WhatsApp or Gmail or Telegram—is, she says, “surprisingly expensive. You may not know that, and there’s a good reason you don’t know that, and it’s because it’s not something that companies who pay those expenses via surveillance want you to know.”

Signal pays $14 million a year in infrastructure costs, for instance, including the price of servers, bandwidth, and storage. It uses about 20 petabytes per year of bandwidth, or 20 million gigabytes, to enable voice and video calling alone, which comes to $1.7 million a year. The biggest chunk of those infrastructure costs, fully $6 million annually, goes to telecom firms to pay for the SMS text messages Signal uses to send registration codes to verify new Signal accounts’ phone numbers. That cost has gone up, Signal says, as telecom firms charge more for those text messages in an effort to offset the shrinking use of SMS in favor of cheaper services like Signal and WhatsApp worldwide.

Another $19 million a year or so out of Signal’s budget pays for its staff. Signal now employs about 50 people, a far larger team than a few years ago. In 2016, Signal had just three full-time employees working in a single room in a coworking space in San Francisco. “People didn’t take vacations,” Whittaker says. “People didn’t get on planes because they didn’t want to be offline if there was an outage or something.” While that skeleton-crew era is over—Whittaker says it wasn’t sustainable for those few overworked staffers—she argues that a team of 50 people is still a tiny number compared to services with similar-sized user bases, which often have thousands of employees.

read more: https://www.wired.com/story/signal-operating-costs/

archive link: https://archive.ph/O5rzD

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] bezerker03@lemmy.bezzie.world 10 points 1 year ago (5 children)

That's about the price to compete for a software eng these days.

Factor benefit costs too.

[–] Max_P@lemmy.max-p.me 6 points 1 year ago

And it's the kind of product you don't want a 80k developer to introduce security vulnerabilities left and right. You get what you pay for.

Security minded people are usually very skilled, and everyone's competing to get them.

Could it be run cheaper? Yes probably. Would the product enshittify after a while? Absolutely yes.

[–] MeanEYE@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

More likely average developer salary and CEO takes couple of millions as a bonus every year, as they all do.

[–] ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is unfortunately almost definitely how it works.

After all, what kind of CEO can live with only having one yacht?

[–] MeanEYE@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

According to tax filings, they are not paying him a single dollar. Which is something am finding very suspicious. Especially considering he gave the company ~$100M for startup. But if it's true, then it's commendable. Person who has $100M in cash to shell out for a startup doesn't need to worry about the money, it's just that they often only care about that.

[–] s38b35M5@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] bezerker03@lemmy.bezzie.world 2 points 1 year ago

It's a great field but super saturated right now. Not a good time to enter lol

[–] TowardsTheFuture@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I mean, multiple places online saying literally less than half that at the high end. Also, I could see a few making that much I guess but all 50 employees?

[–] bezerker03@lemmy.bezzie.world 1 points 1 year ago

All 50 no. But some could be making more than that. Plus benefit costs alone.

[–] bezerker03@lemmy.bezzie.world 1 points 1 year ago

I also dunno signal itself. There's no leveling info or there. According to blind posts asking about the tc I quote.

"Work at signal currently and can say the pay is competitive. There’s no equity given it’s a nonprofit but there are many benefits that add up very quickly. Maxed out 401k match, which is ~$20k right there every year, as an example. As a nonprofit you can look at the 990 (I think the most updated one is from 2019 on propublica) that shows salaries for certain employees."

Reading other posts base salary goes up to 250k.

They don't give equity so maybe benefits being factored in.

[–] interceder270@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] bezerker03@lemmy.bezzie.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What bullshit? Entry level sde 1 at Amazon is 176k. A senior with around 4 to 5 years of experience is 359k.

E5 at Facebook is 412k. Levels.fyi has all the stats.

Like if you're a company competing against these companies for talent that's what you gotta pay. During the pandemic it was even worse with people getting like 20-40k sign on bonuses etc too.