Wow. Merry Christmas indeed.
Telegram gains 1M users after Whatsapp ban
171–180 of 276 posts
Re: Telegram gains 1M users after Whatsapp ban
#172I'm a judge in Brazil. Even tough I'd pray to not be the one that had to give such an impopular order (affecting more then 100 million Brazilians - WhatsApp is really a hit here), we have laws in this country and we must prosecute criminals. Mark's talk about privacy is, in my opinion, totally misplaced. No right is absolute, and that includes the right to privacy. Criminals, for example, simply don't have it. This i…
> No right is absolute, and that includes the right to privacy. Criminals, for example, simply don't have it.
I know nothing of Brazilian law, but in America, criminals have rights, including the right to privacy. Convicted criminals and convicted felons do not, but that is an entirely different category, and your wording seems woefully imprecise.
> Do you guys think that pedophiles, terrorists and drug dealers have the right to privacy ? I don't.
Alleged pedophiles, terrorists and drug dealers have the full panoply of rights available to them as anyone else until such time as enough supporting evidence may be provided that the police can say that a) a crime has been committed, b) the alleged had the means to have committed the crime, c) the alleged had the motive to have committed the crime, d) the alleged had the opportunity to have committed the crime, and often e) the alleged is very likely to have committed the crime.
Only after THAT hurdle is cleared may the rights of the alleged criminal be intruded upon by the state, and without a grand jury, even those intrusions must be minimally invasive.
At least in America, a judge cannot issue a warrant for the wiretaps you described on the mere accusation that "so and so is a {pedophile,terrorist,drug dealer}."
Re: Telegram gains 1M users after Whatsapp ban
#173I'm a judge in Brazil. Your comment history says otherwise: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4167143 Seem to be a run of the mill dev to me. I'm surprised you got as many credulous responses as you did.
Very weird indeed. Although I agree with the reasoning, despite of the authority.
Agreed. This feels like some sort of inverse appeal-to-authority. "You can't be this kind of expert, therefore your assertions are false."
Re: Telegram gains 1M users after Whatsapp ban
#174Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do you assume they aren't someone with a website and have a career?
Anything is possible of course but what is more likely: 1. An elected Judge in Brazil also has a side business of running a marginal tourism website and the time to comment on HN 2. Someone is lying on the internet
The real question is what does it matter to you? Nothing a person says is correct just because they have the right title or label.
Re: Telegram gains 1M users after Whatsapp ban
#175Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If privacy is a human right that cannot be violated ever, how are going to deal with criminals that use services such as WhatsApp? By finding evidence that does not rely on services such as WhatsApp. How did anybody ever get convicted before the age of WhatsApp, or for that matter the invention of the telephone. It's not as if wiretaps and cell phone messages are the only kind of incriminating evidence that can be…
> How did anybody ever get convicted before the age of WhatsApp, or for that matter the invention of the telephone. A nitpick, but I really dislike this line of reasoning. Before WhatsApp criminals communicated using different means which were easier to monitor. Now that they have WhatsApp (or whatever), they will use that instead of easier to monitor methods. A move to modern communication tools gives them an edge o…
> Before WhatsApp criminals communicated using different means which were easier to monitor
Perhaps sloppy criminals did so, but the careful were engaging in schemes more like what we see on "The Wire". Meeting in secluded, noisy locations wherein privacy was all but guaranteed.
People, including not-convicted criminals, have the right to privacy. If the NSA and law enforcement are going to make it harder and harder to find private places through dragnet collection, it should not be surprising that the populace will seek to reclaim privacy.
If it's an arms race, as you say, it's an arms race that law enforcement was winning at so one-sidedly that the relationship was becoming abusive. Tools like WhatsApp, Telegram, Signal, etc., are the citizenry's first efforts at serious competition.
Re: Telegram gains 1M users after Whatsapp ban
#176I'm a judge in Brazil. Even tough I'd pray to not be the one that had to give such an impopular order (affecting more then 100 million Brazilians - WhatsApp is really a hit here), we have laws in this country and we must prosecute criminals. Mark's talk about privacy is, in my opinion, totally misplaced. No right is absolute, and that includes the right to privacy. Criminals, for example, simply don't have it. This i…
[deleted]
Re: Telegram gains 1M users after Whatsapp ban
#177Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do you assume they aren't someone with a website and have a career?
Anything is possible of course but what is more likely: 1. An elected Judge in Brazil also has a side business of running a marginal tourism website and the time to comment on HN 2. Someone is lying on the internet
That just doesn't sound reasonable. University students, to me should be a full-time focus, also very often have one or multiple part-time jobs or even a full-time job while attending classes and doing their school work. Surely being a judge doesn't take 100% of someone's time, and this is also a topic likely close to the commenter. Also, did you look at the date of his tourism website post anyhow?
Re: Telegram gains 1M users after Whatsapp ban
#178I'm a judge in Brazil. Even tough I'd pray to not be the one that had to give such an impopular order (affecting more then 100 million Brazilians - WhatsApp is really a hit here), we have laws in this country and we must prosecute criminals. Mark's talk about privacy is, in my opinion, totally misplaced. No right is absolute, and that includes the right to privacy. Criminals, for example, simply don't have it. This i…
Incorrect. WhatsApp could not deliver what the judge requested, even if they wanted to. Messages are encrypted end to end and not kept in their servers. The Judge requested something impossible. predictably, WhatsApp and Facebook did not comply. The Judge threw a hissy fit and decided to block the service, affecting everyone who uses it (95% of the Internet users in the country). A similar thing happened years ago wh…
Apparently, Whatsapp is only end-to-end encrypted on Android, where it uses TextSecure. On iOS, it still uses RC4.
Re: Telegram gains 1M users after Whatsapp ban
#179Earlier quoted context omitted.
Very weird indeed. Although I agree with the reasoning, despite of the authority.
Agreed. This feels like some sort of inverse appeal-to-authority. "You can't be this kind of expert, therefore your assertions are false."
If you start your post with "I'm an authority" then you are inducing the appeal to authority implicitly through Priming.
Re: Telegram gains 1M users after Whatsapp ban
#180Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anything is possible of course but what is more likely: 1. An elected Judge in Brazil also has a side business of running a marginal tourism website and the time to comment on HN 2. Someone is lying on the internet
The real question is what does it matter to you? Nothing a person says is correct just because they have the right title or label.
If the goal is to simply make a compelling argument then stating your title immediately induces bias.