Evidence that the FBI can hack into private Signal messages on a locked iPhone • Hacker News Board

Re: Evidence that the FBI can hack into private Signal messages on a locked iPhone

#241

Post by exabrial » Sat, Feb 13, 2021, 4:59 PM UTC

reaperducer wrote: post #66

exabrial wrote: post #25

I hate be a spoil sport, but generally I don't need protection from the FBI, NSA, CIA. I need convenience to unlock my phone/laptop quickly with a fingerprint, even after a restart. XKCD nails this: https://xkcd.com/538 I'm MOST concerned with Google/Facebook continuously circumventing laws and violating my opt-out preferences. I'd like to have a null advertising ID for instance. Can't do that. And besides, you don't…

I hate be a spoil sport, but generally I don't need protection from the FBI, NSA, CIA. Awesome. Good for you. However, there are people out there who are busy changing the world, holding the powerful to account, and generally being involved in society in ways that are less safe and more interesting than you do. This is about them, not about you.

> there are people out there who are busy changing the world

It's kind of interesting to me to see the Apple bullshit propaganda being repeated on HN so many times.

Tell me, do you have root access to your phone and are your binaries created from reproducible builds? Otherwise it is marketing wank.

Re: Evidence that the FBI can hack into private Signal messages on a locked iPhone

#242

Post by torwayburger » Wed, Feb 24, 2021, 3:05 PM UTC

beervirus wrote: post #188

torwayburger wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's written as a statement, not as a figure of speech. If it's not intended to be factual, it should be annotated as such. It literally claims theft as it stands, which makes the article seem juvenile in use of language.

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/figure-of-speech It doesn't have to be labeled in big flashing letters "THIS IS A FIGURE OF SPEECH" for reasonable people to construe it as a figure of speech.

Beervirus is stealing my time by arguing nonsense.

See? Clearly presented as fact by the language used and yet clearly it's nonsense. No label necessary.

Re: Evidence that the FBI can hack into private Signal messages on a locked iPhone

#243

Post by torwayburger » Wed, Feb 24, 2021, 3:09 PM UTC

TameAntelope wrote: post #191

torwayburger wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's written as a statement, not as a figure of speech. If it's not intended to be factual, it should be annotated as such. It literally claims theft as it stands, which makes the article seem juvenile in use of language.

It's not written as a "statement [of fact]", that is incorrect. How did 'beervirus and I know how to interpret the phrase successfully?

You're interpretation of it isn't wrong. You're still wrong in asserting that it wasn't presentes as a fact in the article. It clearly, linguistically is.