Signal president says company will not comply with U.K. ‘mass surveillance’ law
1–10 of 409 posts
Re: Signal president says company will not comply with U.K. ‘mass surveillance’ law
#2Perhaps the proponents of this can demonstrate how it works and make sure all their communications are scanned and sent to a "trusted party".
Re: Signal president says company will not comply with U.K. ‘mass surveillance’ law
#3Re: Signal president says company will not comply with U.K. ‘mass surveillance’ law
#4Governments seem to want to have it both ways. As new technologies are introduced they assume that capabilities and practices available to analogous predecessors must remain available to them (e.g. wire-tapping phones => undermining cryptography) but they don’t feel the same way about public benefits or rights associated with other technology that is being replaced (anonymous cash transactions => ???)
It also seems like there’s a tendency to relitigate battles that are lost. I assume the UK had some equivalent to the 90s crypto wars in the US where attempts to weaken and backdoor crypto by legal means were pretty decisively defeated.
It’s sad that precedents should only accrue to one side’s benefit.
Re: Signal president says company will not comply with U.K. ‘mass surveillance’ law
#5Related post from 10 days ago which goes into more depth on this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36596610
TL;DR: UK government wants to degrade public's right to privacy / encryption under the guise of "but think of the children!"
Re: Signal president says company will not comply with U.K. ‘mass surveillance’ law
#6Governments seem to want to have it both ways. As new technologies are introduced they assume that capabilities and practices available to analogous predecessors must remain available to them (e.g. wire-tapping phones => undermining cryptography) but they don’t feel the same way about public benefits or rights associated with other technology that is being replaced (anonymous cash transactions => ???) It also seems l…
> I assume the UK had some equivalent to the 90s crypto wars in the US where attempts to weaken and backdoor crypto by legal means were pretty decisively defeated.
I'm thinking of the fact that GCHQ invented RSA in 1973, four years before Ron Rivest, Adi Shamir and Leonard Adleman publicly described the same system, and only got around to declassifying this in 1997.
Re: Signal president says company will not comply with U.K. ‘mass surveillance’ law
#7Her television interview with the former(?) minister responsible for this abomination of a law was urgent and necessary. These legislators know what they are doing, and that it is unethical. Let Signal leave the UK market. If the people want freedom, let them take it themselves. Perhaps before this generation of young men are rounded up for another one of history's meat grinders in Ukraine, as a means to further reduce domestic resistance to the new agenda.
What new words can be written that would suddenly enlighten the managers of that government and deter it from its course of fully atomizing its citizens? I'd suggest the greatest service Signal could do for the people of the UK is to suspend operations in the market preemptively. Turn into the torpedo. The thing about totalitarianism is that the longer people believe they are safe from it, the deeper its roots dig in.
Re: Signal president says company will not comply with U.K. ‘mass surveillance’ law
#8Her television interview with the former(?) minister responsible for this abomination of a law was urgent and necessary. These legislators know what they are doing, and that it is unethical. Let Signal leave the UK market. If the people want freedom, let them take it themselves. Perhaps before this generation of young men are rounded up for another one of history's meat grinders in Ukraine, as a means to further redu…
I wasn't aware the Russian army was recruiting from the UK?
Re: Signal president says company will not comply with U.K. ‘mass surveillance’ law
#9Governments seem to want to have it both ways. As new technologies are introduced they assume that capabilities and practices available to analogous predecessors must remain available to them (e.g. wire-tapping phones => undermining cryptography) but they don’t feel the same way about public benefits or rights associated with other technology that is being replaced (anonymous cash transactions => ???) It also seems l…
Of course. It's a class war. When you say the words "class war" far too few people think about the isomorphism to "actual, real" war, but it's there. Sure, the government isn't dropping bombs on London, but the ends are the same.
Re: Signal president says company will not comply with U.K. ‘mass surveillance’ law
#10Who persuades politicians it’s a good idea for the security services to be able to scan all their messages? I am absolutely certain that the politicians have absolutely no clue what they’re being asked to implement.