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

611–618 of 618 posts

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

#611

Post by GhettoComputers »

DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #506
shakna wrote: post #500

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not exactly a secret and any discussion of Tor's history will immediately bring it up, but sure. > For the onion router to work properly, the Navy needed to step back from running it. A cloaking system is not useful if all the cloaks say “Navy” on them. “If you have a system that’s only a Navy system, anything popping out of it is obviously from the Navy,” Syverson says. “You need to have a network that carries…

Ah - wow, dang. I believed the cover-story that Tor was a side-project of a humanitarian org in the US gov that wanted to provide people in firewalled countries a way to access the wider internet - of course, Tor does do that (just as a nice side-effect, and to be fair, the US does benefit and encourage democratic (...and neoliberal) ideals worldwide as its in their own interests to). ...it's kinda like how we were a…

The space race was a test for intercontinental ballistic missiles.

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

#612

Post by olah_1 »

jiggunjer wrote: post #607
olah_1 wrote: post #604

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s actually quite brilliant on Status. Everyone gets a random super long number for an ID. Your friends can assign your name when they add you as a contact (just like phone numbers). And then you can also get a globally recognizable name like ENS domains if you want to pay a little. It’s like a vanity plate on a car.

but what prevents me from using your ID? I'm guessing something like a blockchain.

It’s just a random keypair. You can’t use my ID because you would only see my public key.

https://specs.status.im/spec/2#initial-key-generation

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

#613

Post by tehjoker »

ospray wrote: post #220
tehjoker wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's pretty crazy that people still think elections do anything and aren't just a sham while the rulers plug in the choices from above.

Don't let people tell you not to vote, because it won't make a difference. Not voting is a sure way not to have a voice.

I advocate joining a revolutionary political party instead. If you have a big enough constituency that can cause problems, they will eventually have to acquiesce to demands as opposed to simply controlling the choices or ignoring the results of a vote (which I would point out happens routinely, even in presidential elections such as the 2000 election theft or the attempted theft and coup of 2020).

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

#614

Post by _carbyau_ »

salawat wrote: post #414
_carbyau_ wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is the internet doesn't provide the required service for individuals to find each other directly. We need DNS for everyone, not just the rich...er those bothering to register a name. Make it GUID based, and let people contact each other by GUID instead of phone number. Preferably add privacy enhancing encryption too so that only those with your public key could decrypt your GUID DNS entry to then find your…

as soon as you create a namespace like that, you've made the lever that will be utilized for centralized control. In reality, if you had no chance of getting somewhere without the centralized registry, you don't have the connection.

What I am proposing is an extension to DNS to allow individuals to find each other directly rather than having to go through middlemen like FB etc to simply message each other.

DNS already exists as a point of centralised control. Service Providers already have to log IP vs user accounts.

don't see how extending DNS for the masses could make things any worse.

As a sibling comment points out though, who pays to run it?

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

#615

Post by _carbyau_ »

phicoh wrote: post #512
_carbyau_ wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is the internet doesn't provide the required service for individuals to find each other directly. We need DNS for everyone, not just the rich...er those bothering to register a name. Make it GUID based, and let people contact each other by GUID instead of phone number. Preferably add privacy enhancing encryption too so that only those with your public key could decrypt your GUID DNS entry to then find your…

As far as I know, Matrix wants to do something similar to this. They want user IDs to be public keys. A user ID can be bound to a name, but can change the name over time and keep your connections. I'd say the big problem at the moment is that people are not used to paying for service. Lots of stuff related to naming is very cheap. But if you require it to be free, then you will get bad incentives like trying to build…

Would it be a thing that ISPs could manage/charge users for?

That way, users ARE paying for it. And honestly, it is a fundamental internet service, just not in the way most people think of.

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

#616

Post by raxxorrax »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #23

Beautiful. That's how you do it. I actually believe that law enforcement has the legal right to subpoena information, with a judge's consent, while investigating criminal activity. This is exactly the solution to that problem. These platforms should want to know as little about you as possible.

Exactly, but I fear that government is a step away to ask for ID for any online service. Median age in politics is pretty old and regarding security and experience from the last 20 years suggest they are also easily scared.

While you might forgive someone working for interior ministries, this is an automatism towards fearful stupidity. Benefits don't play are role here, it is exclusively about any potential security benefit, doesn't matter how small.

Sadly signal is based on phone numbers which I dislike, but other messengers should take note here.

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

#617

Post by raxxorrax »

jodrellblank wrote: post #405
pennaMan wrote: post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would go further and ask for mandatory 24/7 surveillance of elected officials for transparency and to combat corruption every time they bring up this bullshit.

In the UK the government introduced a "record of everyone's internet history" law and then exempted themselves from it. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13087339

Same with the EU. Old continent doing things old minds do...

It won't help them but will still do a lot of damage. And they wonder why people don't trust a single word they say. Poor representatives...

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

#618

Post by CRConrad »

overeater wrote: post #354
jonas21 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I didn't realize what an enormous difference this made until I ran the numbers. In your example above, let's say the person purchased those 10 Meta shares for $38 each at the IPO and they're worth $322 each now. That's $3220 in proceeds and a $2840 capital gain. The taxes on this depend on income level and state of residence, but let's say they're in CA making $300K/year. They'll pay 20% federal capital gains t…

Isn't that double counting? In the first scenario, $2252 is the amount that they get in their bank account post-tax (marginal). In the second scenario, they get $0 in their bank account post-tax (marginal), and there is a deduction but that occurs on the amount donated so they don't really gain $1459 but rather avoided paying those taxes.

Avoiding paying taxes leaves more in your bank account than if you had to pay them, so it's still a gain, isn't it?
Post reply on HN