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

Grand jury subpoena for Signal user data, Central District of California

signal.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

571–580 of 618 posts

Re: Grand jury subpoena for Signal user data, Central District of California

#571

Post by snugghash »

gm3dmo wrote: post #462
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You prevent them from gaining power by winning debates against them and demonstrating to everyone why they're wrong. I mean have you actually seen the "science" used to claim even the existence of different races? It's all misleading statistics and pseudoscience. You group a bunch of people together based on geographical origin and then observe some differences in the averages between the two groups, ignoring that th…

>There are probably more trolls pretending to be Nazis than there are actual Nazis. "We are what we pretend to be." --- Kurt Vonnegut

That's better as "the effects of my pretend actions are very real" than anything more subtle

Re: Grand jury subpoena for Signal user data, Central District of California

#572

Post by snugghash »

Hallucinaut wrote: post #503
DeathArrow wrote: post #470

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Individuals who dared to make anthropological, social and genetic studies on ethnic groups were retaliating upon with great anger and were banished from academic life even if the scientific methodology was sound. No one dares to do such studies anymore so we can conclude that the "good" has won.

Unless I'm misinterpreting your angle, this sounds like a blatant, hysteric mistruth. Nearly every day I see studies where social and ethnic groups are used to partition and understand the population, particularly with COVID. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7015e2.htm So it depends what you mean. If you mean there are no studies done with such partitioning aimed towards the benefit of those groups, I call th…

You're missing an important point here, that Eric Weinstein brings up a lot. The goal of science is finding truth, but the mechanism of how it happens right now is very tied to the "goal" of each study. Goal-less data collection is apparently impossible to certify and "be acknowledged".

>no societal value beyond reinforcing or justifying an established hegemony or excusing discrimination Researchers might have hypotheses they want to test, and any hypothesis that's not "good" is not explored. Because 1. real identities and careers are affected 2. collected data isn't good enough for journals

Re: Grand jury subpoena for Signal user data, Central District of California

#573

Post by snugghash »

maccard wrote: post #491
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You prevent them from gaining power by winning debates against them and demonstrating to everyone why they're wrong. I mean have you actually seen the "science" used to claim even the existence of different races? It's all misleading statistics and pseudoscience. You group a bunch of people together based on geographical origin and then observe some differences in the averages between the two groups, ignoring that th…

> You prevent them from gaining power by winning debates against them and demonstrating to everyone why they're wrong. "A lie can travel around the world and back again while the truth is lacing up its boots." It doesn't matter how solid your facts are if people are listening to vox pops of people who back their own internal beliefs. > There is no way for a Nazi to win that on the facts because the facts are against…

Our tooling for communicating ideas and finding good ones is equivalent to mob rule, same as a hundred years ago, just amplified. More at my older comment https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29051178

> Pop onto stormfront and try convince a handful of posters there and see how far you get.

I've actually done this - it's far easier than you make it seem. I haven't really started collecting metrics on success, but that's kinda what we're missing - messengers who construct a pyramid of truthy statements and go back up the chain to whoever convinced THEM to a particular viewpoint when they find resistance to change from the opposite side. We're missing tech that incentivizes such behavior.

Of course this requires that everyone has a set for themselves a threshold for when they would change their mind about a topic - which I find is far more prevalent among US conservatives (at least online, as they behave to me), than when you try to establish the same among US liberals. Of course, ignoring the obvious field that doesn't have a threshold by design - supremacist religion.

My working theory is that supremacist religionists who converted out of it simply replaced it with liberal ideas (and were being supremacist about those), while there are both religionists and non-religionists among the conservatives.

Re: Grand jury subpoena for Signal user data, Central District of California

#574

Post by [deleted] »

projektfu wrote: post #513
repsilat wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they cannot fight every single fight I think "failing to support" in the grandparent comment is too weak for some. This is Glenn Greenwald on a recent ACLU amicus brief[1]: >> This is the first time, at least to my knowledge, that ACLU is explicitly arguing in court that the First Amendment's free speech clause has been interpreted *too broadly* by courts, and are advocating *a more restrictive view* of what free s…

If Greenwald's high school teacher found out he was gay and started referring to him with feminine pronouns, because the teacher felt being gay feminizes you, would Greenwald just chalk that up to free speech? Or would he consider it bullying that ought to stop? What if a white teacher spoke to the only black student in the room using his own version of AVE, and used his usual English for the rest of the class? I don…

[deleted]

Re: Grand jury subpoena for Signal user data, Central District of California

#575

Post by dang »

zarzavat wrote: post #327

[flagged]

Please don't post canned arguments to HN. They point to super-repetitive/generic places, and those usually get nasty, as indignation rushes in to fill the curiosity vacuum.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29044863.

Re: Grand jury subpoena for Signal user data, Central District of California

#577

Post by arminiusreturns »

ekianjo wrote: post #267
singron wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is definitely not true. Dianne Feinstein for instance has been instrumental in almost all of these efforts. As a senator from California, she could be replaced with someone nearly politically identical that didn't support government surveillance.

who you are before you get elected and after are not the same. never forget that.

For lots of reasons. There are 100 Epsteins you dont know the name of still at large, and their main purpose is blackmail of top politicians and businessmen on behalf of whatever intel agency or mafia runs them. Trumps mentor Roy Cohn was one of these.

And blackmail is only one tool in the toolbelt. Bribery comes long before that. Anybody with too much integrity is quickly removed from office or worse.

Ive tried to explain to some progressives why AOC and the squad have turned their backs on them with this, but for many their schoolhouse rock propagandized brains refuse to admit its as bad as it is.

It only gets worse the more we aquiesce to increases in censorship and surveillance (which I like to remind people is in the hands of the executive branch, further eroding the checks and balances system).

Re: Grand jury subpoena for Signal user data, Central District of California

#578

Post by ajsnigrutin »

hvdijk wrote: post #498
ajsnigrutin wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep... once noone defends the nazis, anyone can be branded a nazi, and you lose one more right (free speech). And sadly, the word 'nazi' has lost all of it's meaning in the last years, and has gone from swastika carrying Hitler supporters to someone who doesn't want illegals working below minimum wage to take his job.

If people come to a different country to make a better life for themselves than they would in the countries they were originally from, what's wrong with that? If you're regarding them as sub-humans who don't deserve to work to make a decent life for themselves, rather than directing your anger at the employers who exploit those unable to rise up against the poor pay/working standards/..., we could argue over whether…

There is always someone from some shithole country who's willing to do the work cheaper than you.

I live in a small european country, and literally every foreign worker is lowering the wages of all the local workers - because why offer higher pay to get a local, if you can get some cheap foreigner to do it at minimum wage? And i'm talking about legal workers... if you take in account illegals, that are willing to work below minimum wage, the situation gets even shittier for locals.

Re: Grand jury subpoena for Signal user data, Central District of California

#579

Post by bmakdbd »

GhettoComputers wrote: post #560
bmakdbd wrote: post #493

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you actually serious? You don’t know which race the US discriminated against in the past 100 years? Native Americans. Who stole pretty much all of their land, sent them on death marches [1] and kept them out of politics with discriminatory policies? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trail_of_Tears

How can you be taken seriously if your idea of 100 years different from everyone else's?

Ah yes forgot about the 100 years lol.

Re: Grand jury subpoena for Signal user data, Central District of California

#580

Post by tptacek »

wraptile wrote: post #460
dcdc123 wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Am I the only one sort of bothered by the fact they shared that specific information with the world? It may not seem like much, but that was user data.

I'm failing to see how this could be useful to anyone.

It's potentially useful to the target of the subpoena, who knows when they created their Signal account, and might thus now know that they're under investigation.
Post reply on HN