"Out of Control" is freedom.
Wall Street's WhatsApp Secret: Illegal Texting Is Out of Control
31–40 of 86 posts
Re: Wall Street's WhatsApp Secret: Illegal Texting Is Out of Control
#32Who did whatsapp piss off? there seems to be real campaign against them
The campaign is against all encrypted apps and they just happen to use WhatsApp as a scape goat since it has the largest user base. Targeting Signal or some other obscure encrypted messaging app wouldn't be as effective.
Re: Wall Street's WhatsApp Secret: Illegal Texting Is Out of Control
#33[deleted]
Re: Wall Street's WhatsApp Secret: Illegal Texting Is Out of Control
#34this sounds like Bloomberg LP terminal advertising
Re: Wall Street's WhatsApp Secret: Illegal Texting Is Out of Control
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, it is an easy way to "sell" these things... Anyway, I've got two: paedophiles and terrorist. Apparently, traders have now joined that elite. I'm just surprised bankers didn't make it there first... given the public sentiment. (I'm not sure I have any position (heh) on the matter myself.)
Texting while driving does actually kill, but there is a less definable/unpopular "them" to target.
That, and encrypted texting while driving is just as dangerous as unencrypted texting while driving.
Re: Wall Street's WhatsApp Secret: Illegal Texting Is Out of Control
#36encrypted apps dont break SEC laws, people break SEC laws
Can a corollary to the NRA riff be poor software design and bugs don't create vulnerable systems, hackers create vulnerable systems? It's like saying, coal in and of itself does not create global warming, it's people wanting jobs and cheap energy who contribute to global warming.
I thought it was vulnerability-ignorant architects create vulnerable systems
Re: Wall Street's WhatsApp Secret: Illegal Texting Is Out of Control
#37So the media starts to scare us about illegal texting. Oh no! Lets make all chat apps non-secure so the bankers can no longer chat illegally anymore
Actually that's a pretty big deal. Financial institutions have far more stringent rules than an average company regarding communications.
Analysts must be shielded by "Chinese walls" from traders. Just imagine what a trader can do if he gets a 20 minute head start (or just a few pertinent bullet points) of an influential report, which is about to be published. Look up 'front running' for details.
Communications within financial companies and between banks and outside entities are pretty heavily regulated. And for very good reason.
Re: Wall Street's WhatsApp Secret: Illegal Texting Is Out of Control
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, it is an easy way to "sell" these things... Anyway, I've got two: paedophiles and terrorist. Apparently, traders have now joined that elite. I'm just surprised bankers didn't make it there first... given the public sentiment. (I'm not sure I have any position (heh) on the matter myself.)
Texting while driving does actually kill, but there is a less definable/unpopular "them" to target.
In that case, however, it does not matter if the messages are encrypted or not.
Re: Wall Street's WhatsApp Secret: Illegal Texting Is Out of Control
#39The subtlety missing is that the 'chat room' scandals were (at least in part) conducted on Bloomberg's own platform[1] And that one of the 'big brother-like databases' was the one their journalists used to write articles based on how their clients used their platform [2] The article doesn't really touch on the publisher's skin in the game other than mentioning how compliance friendly their chat now is. Hmm...
[1] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21358362
[2] https://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/05/13/business/media/bloombe...
Re: Wall Street's WhatsApp Secret: Illegal Texting Is Out of Control
#40In other news: they also meet and talk!!!
Yes. Which kind of journalist write these pieces anyway? What kind of publisher is so corrupt that they'd both have the wrong idea of freedom, the wrong journalist to write them, the wrong editor to validate the article and the wrong readers who are gullible enough that this headline makes it through to reader's vote?