Considering how he's tarnished Signal, there is absolutely no reason for them or anyone else to back him up.
What will be very funny is the fact that Telegram is pretty much not encrypted (yeah ok, "secret chats", whatever sure) and now that investigators probably have access to Durov's phone, that lack of encryption might come back to bite him in the ass. Can't wait to know what they find and if they do find something, it might be interesting to see if he finally changes his stance.
Basically only Signal + Whatsapp.
> claiming they don't do anything for privacy.
Well, Signal is kind of a scam in that regard.
Mandatory phone number exposure? (or did they finally implement usernames?)
A joke of a "registration lock pin" instead a proper 2FA to protect against sim-swap?
They received $3 million from the open technology fund, which is a government sponsored fund for censorship circumvention projects. https://www.opentech.fund/about/congressional-remit/
tl;dr: Lots of claims, lots of support.. but very little to back it up once you scratch the surface.
people in this field tend go overboard with security when really nobody cares about what they have access to.
What did he have to say about Matrix?
If you don't uphold the principles all you have to do is wait until it bites you too.
What happened to "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
Nothing. It still is the same fake Voltaire quote used to con overly idealistic adversaires into giving you some situational supprt against their better interest. No institutional actor ever followed it.
So was Moxie - or do we forget that Signal is doing cryptocurrencies too?
Yes, that includes people from Russia, China or the US believing they are the ones who are truly free, and everything else are totalitarian shitholes. Each one of them is even kind of right in their own regard.
In Russia, China or North Korea - nobody believes that.
Well of course, they're all actually super miserable and are secretly begging the government of your country or her stronger allies to liberate them and wisely lead to a glorious bright westernized future.
Don't be naive. It's probably worth exploring where'd you get such a maximalist idea in the first place and measure just how much empirical evidence you have to back it up.
No, they are not.
Nobody in Europe disappears for six months because they have offended the government before mysteriously reappearing like in China. No one dictates single handedly what’s going to happen without any form of oversight like in Russia.
Heck France currently has an interim government because they voted out the previous one and the US had a decisive election coming in a few months.
The people who want to convince you otherwise generally have a vested interest in undermining democracy and pushing for a form of autocracy.
Not even close. You are just poorly informed about the situation in Russia or China.
HN: NO! free speech.
Sincere advice: get out of those libertarian echo chambers, and think about real consequences.
IF you let LEO's access group chats THEN you absolutely need civilian accountable honest transparent clear oversight to avoid mission creep.
The task isn't as clear cut as "known criminal is part of OC groups", there's a clear Sorities Paradox asking when does an OC group chat become a neighbourhood watch | knitting group chat.
If our criminal of interest is part of RealMafiaChat, PrepperLifeStyles, CamThePolice, GuideDogsForVets, etc. etc. et al. then how many of these should be surveilled .. and how many other group chat members should also be surveilled ?
Yes. Take down real criminals.
Yes, it's an actual problem that real innocents get swept up Kafka-esque for being unwittingly criminal adjacent.
What's the cost benefit number and trade off for actual innocent lives ruined?
I am pretty much against surveillance in the form of drag nets, but none of that applies here. Instead, this is exactly how a functional state should work.
(And note that no exceptions are made for Pavel because he is rich and well-connected. Contrast that with brittle countries where politicians rely on tech billionaires to fund their campaigns.)
I sympathize with you being an Aussie; I can see where your allergy comes from, but in this case it is misplaced.
Yes, functional states should have extremely good oversight .. in reality they "mostly do" but with cracks that allow unwanted behaviours to sneak through and sometimes become normalised.
eg. recent revelations that SASR types are "blooding" new members with unsanctioned kills in war zones. Or regular joe LEO types using surveillance powers to stalk ex's. Or total innocent gets railroaded by tangential "evidence" simply because they chance to tick all the boxes for a needed arrest and the actual perp was overlooked | unseen.
> I would be very concerned if your knitting grandma was an active member of a drugs and arms dealergroup.
And yet an actual sergeant at arms type of an organised biker gang based in Australia used knitting terminology key phrases in just such a group to organise international transfers of "packages".
The person in question was a NZ background stone cold killer with a special forces background.
( Yes, most crims are "dumb" | "lazy" and yet a good few understand covert messaging, not all can be caught with a fake encrypted phone honey net trap )
These are all real concerns and examples of things that have actually happened.
This is also why the US did not inherit a real, solid concept of personal privacy. Instead, ordinary people are increasingly becoming sort of property of corporates. You can see that if you contrast the Rheinland model (state reigns in corporates, protect people rights) with the Anglo-sphere, which is much more suited to a few select capital holders extracting value from the workforce (compare holiday allowance, fire at will etc).
This doesn´t mean that in Europe the Rheinland model is not under active threat, far from it. And look at collective self harm: watch this space (HN) if the EU sometimes takes measures against abusive monopolies. It is a very difficult fight.
It’s really chilling to see the steps EU gobs are taking against free speech. In some ways they seem more authoritarian than even China and Russia. It’s like “free world” is becoming a farce.