Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We Chat, They Watch

citizenlab.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

511–520 of 555 posts

Re: We Chat, They Watch

#511

Post by m-p-3 »

hiq wrote: post #320
srg0 wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's interesting. What else is blocked/censored on Facebook Messenger or in WhatsApp? Don't use FM myself.

No text is censored on WhatsApp, it's technically impossible due to E2EE. Obviously you can't send GB of data in one message, and there must some other small client-side restrictions, but nothing you can reasonably call censorship.

There is/was a blacklist of words / domains in the client, the filtering done locally.

https://twitter.com/jernejv/status/671620692924846080?s=19

It's still censorship.

Re: We Chat, They Watch

#512

Post by roenxi »

random314 wrote: post #508
101404 wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Democracy and rule of law usually start to have an advantage over authoritarianism when you surpass an annual GDP per capita of about 5000 USD. So, on the long term, I am optimistic that India will catch up. Especially now that the USA is moving away from China as "work bench". I hope we here in Europe will follow that policy, too. It just makes much more sense to support an emerging democracy than to support a facis…

> Democracy and rule of law usually start to have an advantage over authoritarianism when you surpass an annual GDP per capita of about 5000 USD. Singapore disagrees.

In what sense? Singapore is a democracy. They have a high GDP per capita. They have a very strong rule of law and little corruption. I wouldn't necessarily want to live there but it is one of many democratic countries that looks like a much better bet to live in than China.

Re: We Chat, They Watch

#513

Post by 101404 »

midasz wrote: post #463
101404 wrote: post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So if TMobile or Verizon would drop your call, because you mentioned some political candidate's name, that would be completely okay with you?

Are you comparing facebook to a utility company? But honestly, misinformation in this day and age is such a huge problem. If a source is willfully spreading misinformation (that can be fact checked) then yeah, why should they be allowed to do that? They have absolutely no value, except for the people trying to deceive in order to further their agendas.

So a single billionaire should decide what people can and can not talk about?

My guess is you are a Monarchist then?

Re: We Chat, They Watch

#514

Post by 101404 »

kazagistar wrote: post #445
101404 wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Democracy and rule of law usually start to have an advantage over authoritarianism when you surpass an annual GDP per capita of about 5000 USD. So, on the long term, I am optimistic that India will catch up. Especially now that the USA is moving away from China as "work bench". I hope we here in Europe will follow that policy, too. It just makes much more sense to support an emerging democracy than to support a facis…

Have you not been following the news where India just elected a facist leadership and had numerous deadly race riots supported by their government? Try checking your ideology with reality sometimes.

Please be less racist.

Re: We Chat, They Watch

#515

Post by woutr_be »

RaceWon wrote: post #488
woutr_be wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't think censorship is a big deal? That's exactly the reason why their government gets away with it, because people see it as no big deal.

> That's exactly the reason why their government gets away with it So it's not the death camps then? Hmmmm... I must say that I remain totally skeptical as to your assertion.

You can list any number of things, but we were talking about censorship, so I don’t see the need to throw another subject into the mix.

Re: We Chat, They Watch

#516

Post by yeetman21 »

typenil wrote: post #434
yeetman21 wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

they're a private company and can do whatever they want

It's always odd to me when someone is talking about a public backlash and this is the response. Did they say anything about legality? Facebook is free to do what it wants and the public is free to criticize it. Legality isn't a magic shield against criticism.

>defend censorship of a website that doesn't have any illegal content

yes

Re: We Chat, They Watch

#517

Post by yeetman21 »

andreilys wrote: post #420
yeetman21 wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

they're a private company and can do whatever they want

Sure, and we as citizens can hold these private companies accountable by voicing our concerns to our government representatives who can enact legislation to prevent companies from doing whatever they want.

and they as a billion dollar company can voice their concerns to lobbyist who will then convince the government to do nothing

Re: We Chat, They Watch

#518

Post by [deleted] »

goatlover wrote: post #497
brandonmenc wrote: post #496

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alcohol use sends a person with impaired judgement and often times a short fuse into the public space to wreak havoc. By the millions. How many fist fights, rapes, harassment, spouse and child beatings, car crashes, on the job accidents, chronic illness, and early deaths must society be forced to accept just so people with disposable income can enjoy a nice red wine with their meal? Seems pretty selfish.

Society already has been down the road of banning alcohol, and it went over just as poorly as the war on drugs, with tons of social and economic costs.

[deleted]

Re: We Chat, They Watch

#519

Post by tempestn »

woutr_be wrote: post #515
RaceWon wrote: post #488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's exactly the reason why their government gets away with it So it's not the death camps then? Hmmmm... I must say that I remain totally skeptical as to your assertion.

You can list any number of things, but we were talking about censorship, so I don’t see the need to throw another subject into the mix.

I think your parent is arguing that they use the threat of the camps to back up their censorship.

Re: We Chat, They Watch

#520

Post by [deleted] »

madeofpalk wrote: post #391
modeless wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's another downfall of iMessage. If you have iCloud backup enabled, your iMessage encryption keys are saved to iCloud, allowing Apple to decrypt your messages. And even if you disable iCloud backup, Apple can still read your messages if the person you're talking to has iCloud backup enabled. This is not a secret, it's documented behavior. https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202303 And it's not theoretical, because…

Are your iMessage encryption keys stored in iCloud? Or is a seperate copy of your messages (encrypted with a key Apple controls) uploaded to iCloud for sync? Edit: > Messages in iCloud also uses end-to-end encryption. If you have iCloud Backup turned on, your backup includes a copy of the key protecting your Messages. This ensures you can recover your Messages if you lose access to iCloud Keychain and your trusted de…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN