271–280 of 629 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can't fix social problems with technology. The issue here is Brazilian law and the failure to understand the implications of encryption by the courts, not WhatApp's connection architecture.
Sure you can! Imagine if Brazil tried to ban Bitcoin. How successful do you think they would be?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Very. For the moment, you have to take your salary in your local currency. Therefore, you need an exchange to get Bitcoins, and the exchanges can be shut down. People said The Great Firewall would never work. They were wrong about that, too. The real world CAN infringe on the networked world--quite strongly.
Drugs are (highly) illegal but most people I know are at most two phone calls away from scoring whatever they want whenever they want. I imagine if some third-world countries with capital controls banned Bitcoin, it would look similar (having to call your Bitcoin dealer and pay a markup to move money out of the country but otherwise easily accessible to those in-the-know).
And yet most people don't. Knowing you can do something illegal, and doing it, are vastly different things.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My apps are in the Danish Google Play and Apple App Store... I never been there, I don't read or write danish, I never interacted with danish government, or met any danish person. If the dane government wanted something from me, and sent a letter to some random person, written in danish, even if it reaches me, I wouldn't understand it anyway. Thus, having app in some other country store doesn't prove much, except tha…
> except that you clicked "publish" somewhere on Google or Apple uploading interfaces. At which point you agree to adhere to their laws and regulations. A famous example of someone operating legally under local law, but who got prosecuted for having merely a website accessible in another country, was Kim Dotcom. That’s the current state of international law, either lobby to change it, or accept it, but don't ignore i…
Uhm nope. If my app(published on Apple Store/Google Play) violated a law in Saudi Arabia and they sent me a letter requesting me to appear and subject myself to 100 lashes for violating their law, I would very promptly disregard said letter, to put it politely.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As there are countries where laws cannot be changed, technological solutions can fix the problems once and for all. Even in "democratic" country, you would still have to fight the lobbyists, corporate controlled media and so on.
There's no such thing as a country whose laws can't be changed. Only countries where the people don't care enough to do what's necessary to change them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> except that you clicked "publish" somewhere on Google or Apple uploading interfaces. At which point you agree to adhere to their laws and regulations. A famous example of someone operating legally under local law, but who got prosecuted for having merely a website accessible in another country, was Kim Dotcom. That’s the current state of international law, either lobby to change it, or accept it, but don't ignore i…
>>At which point you agree to adhere to their laws and regulations. Uhm nope. If my app(published on Apple Store/Google Play) violated a law in Saudi Arabia and they sent me a letter requesting me to appear and subject myself to 100 lashes for violating their law, I would very promptly disregard said letter, to put it politely.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But, as it says in the article, WhatsApp just doesn't have the data the judge wants it to turn over. How does it make sense to punish a company for not doing something that it physically cannot do?
The Law orders it to collect the data, the data is available and Watsapp does collect it, but instantly discards (or so they claim). What is in there that can not be punished? I don't think this specific law is a good one, but it is not in clear violation of our Constitution, and was brought up by People's representatives... We should fight for improving it, and we should stop relying on infrastructure owned by priva…
Which law orders them to collect the data?
I'm here to defend the judge's ruling, a position very unpopular among all my friends here in Brazil. Brazilian law regarding regarding privacy of users of internet services is very recent and clear: if a judge order the company to share a specific user data, the company must comply. You can disagree with the law, but the law is there. Now, the judge ordered Whatsapp to share a particular user conversation (a suspect…
Curious if you have an explanation of why given it appears the majority of your friends do not support this, why do you and they do not?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Drugs are (highly) illegal but most people I know are at most two phone calls away from scoring whatever they want whenever they want. I imagine if some third-world countries with capital controls banned Bitcoin, it would look similar (having to call your Bitcoin dealer and pay a markup to move money out of the country but otherwise easily accessible to those in-the-know).
> Drugs are (highly) illegal but most people I know are at most two phone calls away from scoring whatever they want whenever they want. And yet most people don't. Knowing you can do something illegal, and doing it, are vastly different things.
If people's life savings depended on circumventing capital controls, they would find a way. It's already a reality in China [1] and (until recently) Argentina [2].
Hell, where I'm from (Canada) 43% of people admit to having smoked marijuana in their lifetimes. And that's just breaking the law for fun, not serious practical reasons like saving $xx,xxx when your crappy central bank decides to inflate away your bank account.
[1] http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-11-02/china-s-sm...
[2] http://www.buenostours.com/getting-the-best-exchange-rate-fo...
I'm here to defend the judge's ruling, a position very unpopular among all my friends here in Brazil. Brazilian law regarding regarding privacy of users of internet services is very recent and clear: if a judge order the company to share a specific user data, the company must comply. You can disagree with the law, but the law is there. Now, the judge ordered Whatsapp to share a particular user conversation (a suspect…
> But Whatsapp simply ignored brazilian justice system as if it was above the law. For me, all of this is Whatsapp fault. Whatsapp deletes its messages from its servers after delivery. So it can't even provide the messages even if it wanted to. Also, since end-to-end encryption, the as-yet-undelivered messages sitting on Whatsapp servers are encrypted. Whatsapp has no way to actually read them.
That's not a valid excuse for any law I'm aware of. It's your responsibility to be aware of, and to comply with, laws in places you do business in. To be clear, this is a terrible law, and I think Whatsapp should absolutely not concede to it. But just so we're clear, "I didn't know any better" isn't an excuse for breaking the law.