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

FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

nbcnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 1001 posts

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#371

Post by unethical_ban »

CMay wrote: post #367

It's not illegal to track law enforcement, but if any of their still visible chats show intent it will hurt them. They'll also want to find out how many people in the group chat are outside of the US, if any money was being exchanged, etc. Hopefully they can unwind these groups, because it's just pitting people against law enforcement who have no idea what they're up against. They don't seem to have a sense for when…

Civil disobedience exists and does not deserve a death sentence.

At least, while decrying civil disobedience, you differ from the administration in one important aspect: You think there should be accountability for police shootings. That's different than the ICE leader, the DHS leader, the FBI director and the Vice President.

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#372

Post by RIMR »

xeonmc wrote: post #335
lateforwork wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> unless we demand answers from Congress, and hold SCOTUS responsible for partisan abdication of their constitutional duties. You can demand answers from Congress, but until a significant portion of the GOP base demands answers, they are just going to ignore your demands. As of now 39% of Americans support the administration. Also, you can't hold SCOTUS responsible, only Congress can.

[flagged]

This is what I don't understand about American authoritarians. Historically speaking, if you try to take away the liberty of Americans, they respond with lethal violence.

Britain tried to tax Americans without government representation, and they started sending the tax man home naked and covered in tar, feathers, and third-degree burns. These stories are then taught to schoolchildren as examples of how Americans demand freedom above all else.

If the powers that be keep doing whatever they want without consequence, eventually there will be consequences, and those consequences very well could be the act of being physically removed from their ivory towers and vivisected in the streets.

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#373

Post by 8note »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #56
therobots927 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

No, they haven’t. This kind of advocacy crosses from lazy nihilism to negligence.

i think it sets the framing that beating them back is from a losing position rather than equal.

if you want the fascists to un-win, you need to treat the world as it is: the fascists are ascendent.

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#374

Post by fsckboy »

xeonmc wrote: post #335
lateforwork wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> unless we demand answers from Congress, and hold SCOTUS responsible for partisan abdication of their constitutional duties. You can demand answers from Congress, but until a significant portion of the GOP base demands answers, they are just going to ignore your demands. As of now 39% of Americans support the administration. Also, you can't hold SCOTUS responsible, only Congress can.

[flagged]

according to urban dictionary, wolfenstein as a verb means

To kill or utterly destroy a large group of enemies with an extreme overabundance of weapons and items, including throwing knives to the head, poison, stabs to the neck or back, kicks to the chest, shoves off of high ledges, multiple headshots, artillery, panzer rockets, flames, dynamite, mines, construction pliers, airstrikes, or even slamming a door into someone's chest. Wolfensteining a group of enemies requires that every kill be performed using a different method

you are calling for extreme violence?

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#375

Post by ncallaway »

CMay wrote: post #367

It's not illegal to track law enforcement, but if any of their still visible chats show intent it will hurt them. They'll also want to find out how many people in the group chat are outside of the US, if any money was being exchanged, etc. Hopefully they can unwind these groups, because it's just pitting people against law enforcement who have no idea what they're up against. They don't seem to have a sense for when…

This is what collaboration looks like

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#376

Post by 8note »

poplarsol wrote: post #354
OhMeadhbh wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually... making noise in a neighborhood is constitutionally protected speech (as I have learned when my neighbors crank the sub-par disco up to 11.)

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.72

this is to say that ICE is breaking MN law no?

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#377

Post by mindslight »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #37
randallsquared wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Conspiracy to commit a crime is typically not included in protected speech. Whether you think that's happening here will depend mostly on what side you take, I suspect.

Interesting that there would be people on a "side" that think there was a conspiracy to commit a crime. What crime?

In the fascist's mind, anything that isn't supporting Dear Leader's vision of "greatness" is a crime.

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#378

Post by elicash »

mrandish wrote: post #218

I suspect they're going to find it challenging to turn protected speech into something prosecutable like obstruction - assuming activists exercise even a modicum of care in their wording. Seems like just another intimidation tactic but in doing that, they've also given a heads-up to their targets.

For all the complaints about the previous DOJ, one thing nobody ever argued was that they weren't intending to get convictions. They only brought cases they thought they could win.

To see DOJ use its power the way we've seen (and I know the original story here is only with FBI at this point), it makes me think there should be some equivalent of anti-SLAPP laws but aimed at federal prosecutions. Some way to fast track baseless charges that will obviously never result in anything and that are just meant to either (a) punish someone into paying a ton of lawyer fees, (b) to intimidate others, or (c) grab some short-term headlines.

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#379

Post by 8note »

CMay wrote: post #367

It's not illegal to track law enforcement, but if any of their still visible chats show intent it will hurt them. They'll also want to find out how many people in the group chat are outside of the US, if any money was being exchanged, etc. Hopefully they can unwind these groups, because it's just pitting people against law enforcement who have no idea what they're up against. They don't seem to have a sense for when…

> because it's just pitting people against law enforcement who have no idea what they're up against.

i think people know exactly what theyre up against: a lawless executive, many members of which have never had to work in places where they are held accountable to the constitution before.

its more important for the government to follow the constitution than for citizens to follow the law. if the government isnt following the law, there is no law

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#380

Post by unethical_ban »

gruez wrote: post #334
OutOfHere wrote: post #59

https://www.phreeli.com/ lets people use phones without revealing identity.

Not sure what the point of the service is. Given that it's more expensive than other MVNOs, and isn't even more private. You can still buy prepaid SIMs in store with cash, so it's harder to get more private than that. Not to mention this company asks for your zip+4 code (which identifies down to a specific street), and information for E-911. It's basically like Trump Mobile but for people who care about "privacy".

I was unaware that you could buy a SIM with cash and no private data collected. I thought they had KYC laws like prepaid cash cards.
Post reply on HN