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

WhatsApp forces Pegasus spyware maker to share its secret code

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 170 posts

Re: WhatsApp forces Pegasus spyware maker to share its secret code

#131

Post by karim79 »

cortesoft wrote: post #84
SturgeonsLaw wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I couldn't care less if there's a group of people misusing the phrase, logically "I could care less" means the exact opposite of "I couldn't care less". The majority of the world is not American, and presumably the majority of Americans don't use the incorrect phrase, so why should the rest of the world cater for a minority within a minority by putting their butchered phrase on equal footing with the correct phrase?

And logically, flammable and inflammable mean the exact opposite, but here we are.

Contronyms are what you're referring to. Indeed, flammable/inflammable, also sanction/sanction (permit/punish) and other examples such as fast/fast (going quickly/held in place).

Still, I do find "I could care less" to be less of a contronym and more of an "Americanism". I'm quite used to it by now, and shall thereby sanction its use.

Re: WhatsApp forces Pegasus spyware maker to share its secret code

#132

Post by delta_p_delta_x »

hackerlight wrote: post #130
delta_p_delta_x wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But "could care less" isn't random. It is an idiom that has the same meaning as "couldn't care less". That is what I meant by 'English is lax enough about its grammar that "the point still gets through"'. 'Could care less' being wrong but semantically understood is exactly along the lines of 'could of' being wrong but semantically understood as 'could've', or the frequent confusion between 'their' and 'they're', or…

> but they are all incorrect, full stop. I don't agree. Correctness is strictly determined by common usage. You're viewing language through the lens of a software engineer, where there are logical rules and primitives that combine together to construct outputs from inputs. Language isn't logically airtight like this. "Could care less" shouldn't be thought of as three words. Think of it as one single new word with its…

> I don't agree. Correctness is strictly determined by common usage.

Happy to agree to disagree, especially when there is this much teeth-gnashing about how 'correct' this usage is—just within this thread. My point about 'could of' was even brought up elsewhere.

> Language isn't logically airtight like this.

But it is—or at least, people make it so. In a world where what people say or write is regularly misconstrued/misinterpreted and lands them in jail, or persecuted, or even killed, I believe clarity, accuracy, (factual and syntactic) correctness, and honesty should be something that every writer should strive toward. Someone else brought up contronyms—which I believe ought to be avoided as much as possible because of their potential to cause much confusion even with context ('sanction' is a very powerful example).

This sort of wishy-washy 'it is correct because people understand it' only reminds me of 'alternate facts'. I don't like it and I wish people wouldn't put up with it.

Re: WhatsApp forces Pegasus spyware maker to share its secret code

#133

Post by [deleted] »

ethbr1 wrote: post #99
asveikau wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with FISA as I understand it is not illuminati. It's that the court probably approves almost everything the government asks for without scrutiny. In general, most courts probably have issues like this -- when their job might be oversight and scrutiny they end up as a rubber stamp for the powerful, like cops, prosecutors, etc. For FISA it's especially bad because decisions and arguments made aren't public.

But it nonetheless exists and could be reformed if there were political will. There was a (much worse) time when FISA didn't exist. There can also be a future time in which something even stronger exists! It's annoying to get low-effort whatabout'isms that are justifications for inaction on the basis that nothing will ever change. It has and it can.

[deleted]

Re: WhatsApp forces Pegasus spyware maker to share its secret code

#135

Post by wlll »

mardifoufs wrote: post #86
SturgeonsLaw wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I couldn't care less if there's a group of people misusing the phrase, logically "I could care less" means the exact opposite of "I couldn't care less". The majority of the world is not American, and presumably the majority of Americans don't use the incorrect phrase, so why should the rest of the world cater for a minority within a minority by putting their butchered phrase on equal footing with the correct phrase?

The majority of the world doesn't speak English, so why care about using correct English at all right? Btw American English is still the most common variant on the internet. More so than British English.

> The majority of the world doesn't speak English

And yet here we are.

To paraphrase David Mitchell (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=om7O0MFkmpw), the problem is not so much the prevelance of American English, which in a lot of situations makes sense. eg. "sidewalk" makes a lot of sense, perhaps more, than "pavement" for the place that a pedestrian walks at the side of a road. "Parking lot" for a lot of land that is reserved for parking etc. The issue is that "could care less" means the opposite of what people intend them to mean, and they're just expecting the people listening to interpret what they mean.

Re: WhatsApp forces Pegasus spyware maker to share its secret code

#136

Post by wlll »

hackerlight wrote: post #66
SturgeonsLaw wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I couldn't care less if there's a group of people misusing the phrase, logically "I could care less" means the exact opposite of "I couldn't care less". The majority of the world is not American, and presumably the majority of Americans don't use the incorrect phrase, so why should the rest of the world cater for a minority within a minority by putting their butchered phrase on equal footing with the correct phrase?

It doesn't mean the opposite, though. For a formal linguistic example, see the concept of compound words. The meaning of the compound word does not equal the meaning of any of the constituent words. Often because the definition of the constituent words has drifted over time while usage of the compound word remained fixed. You may unilaterally think that's wrong because you wish to impose a set of rules on language th…

> It doesn't mean the opposite, though.

It does in my English though, and it really really grates when I hear it. Just because a minority of people have started abusing the language doesn't mean I have to go along with it.

> compound words

Compound words like "afternoon" where the two words themselves make sense together? "couldcare" might be a compound word, but "could care" isn't. Plus, if I start to say "after noon" to mean "mid morning" then get pissed off when people call me out on my language butchery then perhaps my minority take and desire to impose it on the rest of the world would make me the person in the wrong.

Re: WhatsApp forces Pegasus spyware maker to share its secret code

#137

Post by pcdoodle »

snotrockets wrote: post #106
danlugo92 wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

#BitcoinFixesThis

Not really. If you want to end up with money you can actually use for things other than paying ransomware, you have to end up with a bank account somewhere. And as banks wants to transact in USD, they play nice with the US government.

Or sell it for cash at a slight discount. People go through worse things when their local fiat goes out of wack.

Re: WhatsApp forces Pegasus spyware maker to share its secret code

#138

Post by jajko »

silverliver wrote: post #94
selectodude wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are very few FOREX currency pairs that aren’t USD to whatever. Most cross currency trades are currency A to USD and then USD to currency B. So USD is involved and thus the US Government has jurisdiction.

Again, that's only for foreign orgs that want to comply with foreign US law. The involvement of USD in and of itself is not relevant to whether the US government has jurisdiction.

It seems you lack understanding how international banking works in general

Re: WhatsApp forces Pegasus spyware maker to share its secret code

#139

Post by bradleyjg »

rdtsc wrote: post #3

> Initially, the NSO sought to block all discovery in the lawsuit, "due to various US and Israeli restrictions," but that blanket request was denied. Interesting approach. The court could probably care less about Israeli restrictions as it's a different country. Officially US govt blacklisted Pegasus https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2021/11/us-blacklists-ma... . However, I wouldn't be surprised if some US spy agen…

It would be interesting to see if all of the sudden "something happens" and the case is mysteriously dropped.

Conspiracy theories notwithstanding you’d see a sealed court filing and not “something happens.”

Re: WhatsApp forces Pegasus spyware maker to share its secret code

#140

Post by wyldfire »

jevoten wrote: post #43
xxpor wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the NSO group handles dollars. If they didn't respond, they'd lose by default, and the court could order any assets the US can get their hands on seized. If they're getting paid in NIS by countries outside of Israel, the currency conversion happens with dollars as the intermediary. There's the US's window.

How is "Because the NSO group handles dollars" related to "the court could order any assets the US can get their hands on seized"? Presumably, if they were getting paid in bars of gold, the US could seize those too, if they could get their hands on them, no? On the other hand, if they were paid in US dollars, but in cash, that wouldn't establish jurisdiction, nor could it be seized, if the transfer happened outside U…

> that wouldn't establish jurisdiction

The harm is happening in the US, to WhatsApp's customers (among other places). The US court has jurisdiction.

Whether any remedy could be applied is independent of the court's findings.

Post reply on HN