Live data from Hacker News

Government orders GitHub to remove Bluetooth-based chat app Bitchat: Jack Dorsey

thehindu.com

371–380 of 476 posts

Re: Government orders GitHub to remove Bluetooth-based chat app Bitchat: Jack Dorsey

#371
post #323
post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> is not, has never been, and never will be a "goal" of any government on this planet. this is not a productive outlook to have

Your "productive outlook" in this case is mere wishful thinking and campaign rhetoric. It will never come to pass in a meaningful way. The legitimacy of the state is defined by its monopolistic right to use force without meaningful consequence to the institution. It's a difference of degree, but since a government would lose a great deal of its supposed raison d'etre if they actually accomplish the goal, there isn't…

They act on keeping the institutions running, which implies partial citizen safety. With spare resources / generous budget and benevolent politicians, these services can be extended to cover more welfare, with shouldnt exist in the first place, according to you?

Re: Government orders GitHub to remove Bluetooth-based chat app Bitchat: Jack Dorsey

#372
What Jack Dorsey could do for decentralized local chat, better than creating yet another copy of what already exists, is taking 0.1% of his wealth and using it to solve the problems that Briar project has: money.

https://briarproject.org/news/2026-maintenance-mode/

Re: Government orders GitHub to remove Bluetooth-based chat app Bitchat: Jack Dorsey

#373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt it, unless their hazmat suits are bullet-proof.

Please. You could defend yourself from first or second hazmat wearing person that comes to your house, it would be very much different story defending yourself from SWAT team, then remotely detonating drones, finally if it all fails, try to defend yourself against B52.

[flagged]

Re: Government orders GitHub to remove Bluetooth-based chat app Bitchat: Jack Dorsey

#374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? I suppose you'll be able to provide proof that people were forcibly taken?

Dramatic arrest footage shows police surrounding elderly women sitting on park bench https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/health/health-problems/dra... The arrest of a woman in Australia for promoting an anti-lockdown protest online has drawn criticism, after video of the incident went viral. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-54007824 A Victorian police officer who was filmed grabbing a woman around the neck afte…

None of your three examples provide any evidence of hazmat crews forcibly taking away infected people. In fact, your links have absolutely nothing to do with anything at all. It's reasonable to assume that police would arrest people breaching curfew orders.

Under no circumstances was anyone in Australia forcibly removed by people in hazmat suits.

Re: Government orders GitHub to remove Bluetooth-based chat app Bitchat: Jack Dorsey

#375
post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed, and I'm happy to live in a country where this is likely true. The only thing more deadly than pandemics are governments that gained sufficient power to round up their citizens systematically in the name of the public good.

If you think that the 1:30 ratio of guns to people in the US is going to stop the government from doing whatever the fuck they want, you are suffering from a potentially terminal case of optimism. I am an ardent believer in “Those who would give up essential Liberty to purchase a little temporary Safety deserve neither Liberty nor Safety”(even though the context was the Penn family bribing the governor to avoid taxat…

You underestimate how little resistance it takes to make a difference. It's not about every free man in the country single-handedly holding off the might of the US military on his doorstep.

As soon as a single shot is fired in defence, every thug now has to think twice before busting down a door. The game changes. Tyranny becomes a whole lot less efficient.

You send an FBI task force or god forbid the military to interfere with the life of a peaceful stranger and now you've given every man in the country a damn good reason to get himself organised for when they come for his family.

It's clearly not about a flu, at that point.

Re: Government orders GitHub to remove Bluetooth-based chat app Bitchat: Jack Dorsey

#376
post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Outside of embassies, the US wouldn't have a place to set up government facilities in someone else's country. Deportees are handed to the receiving country's authorities at most. ICE "camps" (detention facilities) are to process people prior to deporting. Once in another country, they're already deported.

So if someone is sent to Guantanamo, they're actually sent to Cuba and Cuba chooses to put them in Guantanamo?

Such are anomalies. Do you know of a specific US-owned camp in Mexico?

Re: Government orders GitHub to remove Bluetooth-based chat app Bitchat: Jack Dorsey

#378

Too bad it operates on Nostr, which is crypto-adjacent, otherwise they could move to Codeberg.

Not any more though, right? Didn’t we just learn that Codeberg now bans vibe-coded projects, and that’s how Jack developed it?

Re: Government orders GitHub to remove Bluetooth-based chat app Bitchat: Jack Dorsey

#380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's a Constitutional Republic. Which is a kind of democracy. Democracy is a broad term describing all forms of government where power is granted by the people. This is a weird framing that I see brought up by Americans only, and I don't understand it, because direct democracies (what these Americans are actually referring to when they say 'democracy') are basically extinct in the modern world. They keep trying to…

> Democracy is a broad term describing all forms of government where power is granted by the people No. It's not. I encourage you to read the quite enlightening treatment of democracies in the Federalist Papers. And Greece's government was nothing like Rome. If there is a conflation there, it is one largely created by America. Which in its own right is interesting. What is interesting about the longest-running contin…

> And Greece's government was nothing like Rome.

I presume you're referring to the various systems of democracy introduced in different ancient Greek city-states, as opposed to the Roman Republic. Of course, they're different. But it doesn't run counter to what I said - being descendant from the ideas of democracy doesn't promise you that any aspect of the government will be in any way similar, only that the power will ultimately originate from the people in some way. You don't even have to go ancient for this - there are dozens of different takes on democracy in the modern world.

To emphasize - I'm not arguing against the distinctions or the new ideas that were made during the founding of the US, or that some of these ideas weren't novel. I'm arguing against the school of thought that seemingly arose long after that happened, which tried to categorize the US into a bespoke category of government that included it and excluded other nations, modern and historical - despite them all definitionally being ruled by the people and often even having similar ways of organizing their governments. Let's review the terms.

An autocracy is a state where power descends from a single person, the autocrat. An absolute monarchy is a subset of autocracy, where that person is a monarch, usually with religion tying into their perceived legitimacy. An aristocracy is a state where power descends from an upper elite class. In anarchy, the power descends from no one in particular. Democracy is the class that is opposed to these other forms, it's a system of rule by many where power descends from lots of people. It includes many flavors and forms that result in different types of government - direct, indirect/representative (you are here), as well as many sub-variants that define the exact way of how power moves from the ruled to the rulers or other characteristics.

Therefore, republics are a strict subset of the broad term of democracy. There are lots of republics in the modern world, all of which are democratic states, just as there are constitutional democracies. If you want to distance the US from these other states, you would need to prove why it was not envisioned as a power-from-the-people state and what exactly would place it in a different category that no one else occupies. The US may have been the first, but it's not that unique in the modern landscape of governments.

Post reply on HN