I'm a bit at a loss there. Has _anyone_ ever considered Signal to be anonymous? Or Discord? If so, I have bad news: they are not anonymous. At all. Not even slightly anonymous. Nor did they ever claim to be, they only claim to not be able to read your messages (Signal claims that, I don't know about Discord, I doubt it). And that claim has flaws (sure the crypto is sound but have you thoroughly reviewed and compiled the version you are using right now?)
At the very best, they are weakly pseudonymous, but that's about it. And yes, loading media by default has always been a staple of applications who prioritize their users' convenience at the expense of some security, a fine choice for the usual threat model of their users. And embedding media in messages has always been a staple of deanonymization attacks.
So ok, the tracking pixel has been shown to still be a relevant technique today, that's nice but not surprising.
If you want to remain anonymous though, don't use Discord or even Signal, and I'd advise against posting on HN either. Maybe, if you automate the pasting of messages (no js!) that has been reworded by a local llm from throwaway accounts through whonix, at random times that can't be correlated to your timezone, you _might_ have your chances. Don't bet on it.
Anonymity does not exist any longer.
People do use Signal and Telegram* in settings where anonymity matters. Sure they aren't meant for that, but there's no other widely-understood solution, and most of the time it's good enough for them.
* Funny enough, not vulnerable this time because they use an in-house protocol, which is maybe even worse.
People keep forgetting anonymous and private are two different things
I am currently banned from the Signal subreddit for pointing out that we only have Signal's word that they don't collect metadata. So, yeah, people do consider Signal anonymous...