561–570 of 878 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If you are directly aiding and abetting without any plausible attempt to minimize bad actors from using your service isn't this the definition of "criminal lawyer"?
TV drama tends to give people the wrong idea. Your lawyers aren't allowed to aid you with doing any crimes, they're just advocates.
This seems like the Kim Dotcom situation again. Why are these service providers being punished for what their users do? Specifically, these service providers? Because Google, Discord, Reddit, etc. all contain some amount of CSAM (and other illegal content), yet I don't see Pichai, Citron, or Huffman getting indicted for anything. Hell, then there's the actual infrastructure providers too. This seems like a slippery s…
Watch his interview with Tucker Carlson and you’ll see. He doesn’t acquiesce to government requests for moderation control, censorship, and sharing private user data so they target him. He refuses to implement backdoors as well. In stark contrast to western social media companies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's very bizarre to see all these comments downplaying this, or implying the lack of E2EE by default somehow makes it less attractive to the average user than something like Signal. Most people care about usability and interconnectivity first and foremost because the majority of their messaging activities are not so sensitive that they feel the need to sacrifice those things for mandatory E2EE. Call that shortsighte…
> the same usability and design as telegram From the recent Tucker Carlson interview of Pavel Durov, Telegram has: - 1 PM (Durov) - 1 owner (Durov) - 30 developers - 0 HR, they hire contest.com winners https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41343845
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We have no way to know this Well, other than his arrest ;-)
The arrest tells us that he said no to one country, it doesn't say much about all the others.
And then, he is also on Putin's wanted list; his arrest could one day turn him into a valuable bargaining chip.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Dotcom got extradited (which was declared legal much later). Durov landed in a country that had an arrest warrant out for him. I hope his situation isn't similar to Dotcom's, as Dotcom was shown to be complicit in the crimes he was being persecuted for. Convicting the megaupload people would've been a LOT harder if they hadn't been uploading and curating illegal content on their platform themselves. As a service prov…
https://restoreprivacy.com/telegram-sharing-user-data/ > the operators of the messenger app Telegram have released user data to the Federal Criminal Police Office (BKA) in several cases. According to SPIEGEL information, this was data from suspects in the areas of child abuse and terrorism. In the case of violations of other criminal offenses, it is still difficult for German investigators to obtain information from…
This seems like the Kim Dotcom situation again. Why are these service providers being punished for what their users do? Specifically, these service providers? Because Google, Discord, Reddit, etc. all contain some amount of CSAM (and other illegal content), yet I don't see Pichai, Citron, or Huffman getting indicted for anything. Hell, then there's the actual infrastructure providers too. This seems like a slippery s…
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-charges-le...
Granted, he's moved on to being a Kremlin propagandist and is now shilling anti-Semitism. See:
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, the messaging apps. They suck big-time. By far the worst communication app I’ve ever used. So many bugs… Telegram is indeed the best like others are saying, and WhatsApp is a distant second.
Can you give an example? Never had any problem with Signal.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think it's a crime not to report a crime, at least not where I live. But facilitating a crime, which is something you could accuse telegram of is.
> I don't think it's a crime not to report a crime That heavily depends on the jurisdiction. It's explicitly a crime in Germany, for example: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/stgb/__138.html On top of that, if you can be shown to benefit from the crime (e.g. by knowingly taking payment for providing services to those that commit it), that presumably makes you more than just a bystander in most jurisdictions anyway.
Telegram is genuinely the best general communication platform I have ever used, by far. I really hope he has a good lawyer and this doesn't end up getting essentially murdered for creating it. When you create something that is objectively great, everyone will use it - including bad actors.
I don't understand why anyone uses Telegram if it there is no proof that it is secure. Their code isn't open source?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Russian govt officials are protesting his arrest. When an authoritarian govt is calling for the release of someone who runs a "private" messenger, it suggests they have a back door. Otherwise they tend to oppose all private messaging.
No, there is no logical link between the two events. Russian govt can protest that for propaganda reasons: to make a point that Western governments are restricting freedom of speech.