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

Chat Control is already live on Facebook Messenger

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 24 posts

Chat Control is already live on Facebook Messenger

#1

Post by sputr »

I don’t use Facebook Messenger much, but I did recently to reconnect with a friend from my teenage years.

Today I woke up to the following message: “You can’t send messages for 3 days. Something you sent in a chat went against our Community Standards.” This was followed by a button linking to those standards. And yes, all my chats are locked.

So I’ve been put in “time out.” An American corporation has decided I’m not allowed to speak to my friend for 3 days (our only way to communicate—a mistake in hindsight).

And before you ask: what did I say? Most of the conversation was entirely banal. But at one point I was asked about the most memorable things from my time in politics. Among other things, I mentioned a quiet rumor about a ch#ild pros#####on ring (see, I’m self-censoring! I’m a good and obedient citizen!) in a bar frequented by the local political elite. That was last night. And no, my friend did not report me.

People believe private chats to be, well, private. They also believe that Facebook Messenger is encrypted. Neither is true.

Except that when I tell people about this, the most common response is not surprise or anger, but a kind of weary acceptance - as if the problem isn’t the censorship, but my failure to follow the rules.

I was part of the politically active youth a decade ago, fighting for free speech, net neutrality, against censorship, and against corporate power taking over and corrupting what we saw as a beautiful force for good: the internet. It seems we failed. The well-paid IT jobs turned out to be too sweet to pass up.

I guess we still have Signal. For now.

Re: Chat Control is already live on Facebook Messenger

#2

Post by palata »

First, Chat Control refers to a proposition in the EU, which has not been accepted at this point. So no, it's not Chat Control.

> People believe private chats to be, well, private.

You have to choose an app that seems private enough. Signal is one of the few, because it can be audited easily.

> as if the problem isn’t the censorship, but my failure to follow the rules.

The problem I see is that you disagree with how Meta handles Messenger, but still use it. Chat Control or not, there is no law preventing Meta from reading your messages for moderation.

> I guess we still have Signal. For now.

Yes, and that's a good thing.

Re: Chat Control is already live on Facebook Messenger

#3

Post by pancsta »

palata wrote: post #2

First, Chat Control refers to a proposition in the EU, which has not been accepted at this point. So no, it's not Chat Control. > People believe private chats to be, well, private. You have to choose an app that seems private enough. Signal is one of the few, because it can be audited easily. > as if the problem isn’t the censorship, but my failure to follow the rules. The problem I see is that you disagree with how…

Everyone should be selfhosting a matrix server, with a guest web inbox. Then, some ppl may connect into networks if they want. Lets not forget that Signal is also a for-profit company. IMs should be like DNS, email, or IRC.

Re: Chat Control is already live on Facebook Messenger

#4

Post by yocoda »

Zuck didn't build a social network.

Facebook's real product isn't connecting people; it's redefining what human connection means. They proved emotional states transfer via algorithmic contagion¹, then industrialized it.

Graph Search could find anyone based on intimate details, but felt too predatory. So they embedded the same targeting into every interaction; News Feed, Groups, PYMK-recommendations. Same data harvesting, and behavioral influence with an invisible delivery. The brilliance was introducing Groups. It felt like organic community building, and it keeps enough people on Facebook for them to sell ads.

Two generations now think algorithmic feeds and sharing memes counts as socializing. Why predict and connect when you can nudge and influence?

He weaponized culture at scale.

¹ https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1320040111

Re: Chat Control is already live on Facebook Messenger

#5

Post by palata »

pancsta wrote: post #3
palata wrote: post #2

First, Chat Control refers to a proposition in the EU, which has not been accepted at this point. So no, it's not Chat Control. > People believe private chats to be, well, private. You have to choose an app that seems private enough. Signal is one of the few, because it can be audited easily. > as if the problem isn’t the censorship, but my failure to follow the rules. The problem I see is that you disagree with how…

Everyone should be selfhosting a matrix server, with a guest web inbox. Then, some ppl may connect into networks if they want. Lets not forget that Signal is also a for-profit company. IMs should be like DNS, email, or IRC.

> Lets not forget that Signal is also a for-profit company.

Source? Last time I checked it was a non-profit. But that's not the point. The point is that the Signal app is open source, so you can check what it does.

Matrix is inferior to Signal.

Re: Chat Control is already live on Facebook Messenger

#6

Post by sputr »

palata wrote: post #2

First, Chat Control refers to a proposition in the EU, which has not been accepted at this point. So no, it's not Chat Control. > People believe private chats to be, well, private. You have to choose an app that seems private enough. Signal is one of the few, because it can be audited easily. > as if the problem isn’t the censorship, but my failure to follow the rules. The problem I see is that you disagree with how…

> First, Chat Control refers to a proposition in the EU, which has not been accepted at this point. So no, it's not Chat Control.

The EU proposition of Chat Control is the proposition to make it mandatory. Facebook has already been performing it voluntarily (as I've discovered today).

> The problem I see is that you disagree with how Meta handles Messenger, but still use it. Chat Control or not, there is no law preventing Meta from reading your messages for moderation.

Meta isn't just some random company who's decisions don't have wide and far reaching societal effects.

Moderation of private 1v1 chats only make sense in case of harassment - i.e. when one side complains. In all other cases, except with a courts decree based on legitimate suspicion of wrongdoing, it's absurd.

> Yes, and that's a good thing.

For now.

Re: Chat Control is already live on Facebook Messenger

#7

Post by sputr »

pancsta wrote: post #3
palata wrote: post #2

First, Chat Control refers to a proposition in the EU, which has not been accepted at this point. So no, it's not Chat Control. > People believe private chats to be, well, private. You have to choose an app that seems private enough. Signal is one of the few, because it can be audited easily. > as if the problem isn’t the censorship, but my failure to follow the rules. The problem I see is that you disagree with how…

Everyone should be selfhosting a matrix server, with a guest web inbox. Then, some ppl may connect into networks if they want. Lets not forget that Signal is also a for-profit company. IMs should be like DNS, email, or IRC.

Didn't we go through this before with PGP-encrypted emails? 90+% of users are not technically competent enough to even understand, in the vaguest of terms, what you are saying. Even fewer have the time, ability and resources to do so.

Re: Chat Control is already live on Facebook Messenger

#8

Post by palata »

sputr wrote: post #6
palata wrote: post #2

First, Chat Control refers to a proposition in the EU, which has not been accepted at this point. So no, it's not Chat Control. > People believe private chats to be, well, private. You have to choose an app that seems private enough. Signal is one of the few, because it can be audited easily. > as if the problem isn’t the censorship, but my failure to follow the rules. The problem I see is that you disagree with how…

> First, Chat Control refers to a proposition in the EU, which has not been accepted at this point. So no, it's not Chat Control. The EU proposition of Chat Control is the proposition to make it mandatory. Facebook has already been performing it voluntarily (as I've discovered today). > The problem I see is that you disagree with how Meta handles Messenger, but still use it. Chat Control or not, there is no law preve…

> Meta isn't just some random company who's decisions don't have wide and far reaching societal effects.

So what? There is no law saying that messages should always be e2ee, period. If you want such a law, you need to convince politicians to think about it. But that is orthogonal to Chat Control.

Re: Chat Control is already live on Facebook Messenger

#10

Post by Bender »

sputr wrote: post #7
pancsta wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone should be selfhosting a matrix server, with a guest web inbox. Then, some ppl may connect into networks if they want. Lets not forget that Signal is also a for-profit company. IMs should be like DNS, email, or IRC.

Didn't we go through this before with PGP-encrypted emails? 90+% of users are not technically competent enough to even understand, in the vaguest of terms, what you are saying. Even fewer have the time, ability and resources to do so.

Long ago this was an issue. Now with Thunderbird people can trivially PGP encrypt the body of their emails. With IRC this is done with OTR e.g. irssi-otr. I've manage to get lawyers and family members to use PGP so it can't be that hard.
Post reply on HN