Telegram gains 1M users after Whatsapp ban

Post by marcosdumay » Thu, Dec 17, 2015, 1:03 PM UTC

thiopental wrote: post #59

caio1982 wrote: post #32

What really happened: a drug smuggler with ties to a major criminal organization had been investigated and sentenced several months ago and since July Facebook and WhatsApp folks had not complied (actually they simply ignored all requests) with some users data the justice demanded to keep prosecuting the guy and his associates. Allegedly, according to the new https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazilian_Civil_Rights_Frame…

No worries, in a few years, corporations will be able to sue governments into oblivion for lost revenue on cases like this...

Post by jacquesm » Thu, Dec 17, 2015, 1:05 PM UTC

ethbro wrote: post #102

_jgdh wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its absurdly simple to make someone an alleged criminal. You simply need to accuse them of a crime. There are many countries where the government does exactly this - they accuse people such as human rights activists of crimes like "fomenting discord" and "promoting unrest" and lock them up. Under your enlightened regime of revoking the human right of privacy from alleged criminal, these people would have no recourse.…

I think the reasoning proceed from two different opinions of the citizenry. It's my opinion that in any reasonably developed and old democracy a majority of the population are currently criminals in the sense that they have broken at least one law. In reality, that law is either trivial, inconsistently enforced, or generally ignored. But the important thing is that it's still on the books as the law of the land , and…

Post by rplnt » Thu, Dec 17, 2015, 1:06 PM UTC

rmc wrote: post #112

rplnt wrote: post #21

These messaging apps are worse than... well, I don't know. This is as bad as it gets. Bicycles maybe? Incompatibility, fragmentation.. the worst thing you can have for application that is supposed to be used for communication.

There has always been fragmentation with messaging apps. In the 90s/00s it was MSN and Yahoo and IRQ etc etc

Post by rubidium » Thu, Dec 17, 2015, 1:10 PM UTC

jacquesm wrote: post #100

pqdbr wrote: post #65

I'm a judge in Brazil. Even tough I'd pray to not be the one that had to give such an impopular order (affecting more then 100 million Brazilians - WhatsApp is really a hit here), we have laws in this country and we must prosecute criminals. Mark's talk about privacy is, in my opinion, totally misplaced. No right is absolute, and that includes the right to privacy. Criminals, for example, simply don't have it. This i…

You reap what was sowed. Yes, what the NSA was (is!) doing is completely absurd. The net effect of that is a backlash against all information gathering by authorities and the practical effect of that is that companies will now be differentiated to greater or lesser extent by the amount of privacy their communications platforms give to ordinary citizens. This is what drives https anywhere and other such efforts. That…

Post by Aissen » Thu, Dec 17, 2015, 1:13 PM UTC

varjag wrote: post #90

jdmichal wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love these two parts: > Also, the judge must specify a single phone number or single e-mail account and the decision must be reviewed every 15 days, otherwise it expires. Also, there's a national database of wiretaps that every judge must feed by the end of the month, specifying how many wiretaps there are currently running. Great way to apply natural negative pressure on continuing wiretap operations. It's not imp…

Nothing there that can't be automated with a simple shell script. Not saying the oversight system in Brazil is unreasonable, but you can't rely on the natural disincentives alone.