I don't remember if I've already asked this, but are there any plans to integrate #amber ?
Is SimpleX more secure because it has no ID?
Then why did SimpleX Chat previously only have 1-time invitation links, and now it has added the SimpleX contact address?
What exactly is the SimpleX contact address?
Does it count as an ID? Or does it not?
If Keychat named its features like SimpleX Chat, it would look like this?👇
https://simplex.chat/docs/guide/making-connections.html#comparison-of-1-time-invitation-links-and-simplex-contact-addresses 
nostr:note1ucp7v2226d6kgqllq6pxuff89tzrcmr9x7xf0hyrhdzgjzy92nwqch80r2
Discussion
I don’t recall if I’ve been asked this question before.
The "Amber" you mentioned is likely referring to NIP-46 Nostr Remote Signing, right? We are very likely to support NIP-46.
NIP-46 requires a relay to facilitate signature requests and signatures between a third-party app and a signer app, even if both apps are on the same phone. Therefore, we feel that NIP-46 is not entirely perfect. Perhaps for this reason, NIP-55 Android Signer Application emerged.
In this approach, signature requests and signatures between a third-party app and a signer app (NIP-55) on the same Android phone are handled through internal system communication, without the need for a relay. This solution is better suited for most scenarios. However, iOS does not support NIP-55.
There’s no perfect solution yet, and we are still contemplating.
https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/blob/master/46.md#nostr-remote-signing
Yes, I'm referring to [amber](https://github.com/greenart7c3/amber) which, according to that link, is a NIP-46 implementation, but my understandig is that it does what you're describing as a NIP-55 implementation. Perhaps nostr:nprofile1qqs827g8dkd07zjvlhh60csytujgd3l9mz7x807xk3fewge7rwlukxgpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhszrnhwden5te0dehhxtnvdakz7auvdel could chime in here?