Live data from Hacker News

FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

nbcnews.com

661–670 of 1001 posts

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#661

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't sign up without one, and it being an option means people who are in danger won't do it. Also, if someone's phone is confiscated, and you're in their Signal chats and their address book, it doesn't matter if you're hiding your number on Signal. It's better to just not require such identifying information at all.

That's true for any system where you have contacts linked. Same thing happens when you have names and avatars. If you don't want to link your contacts... don't link your contacts... But this doesn't have the result that the GP claimed. The whole network doesn't unravel because in big groups like these one number doesn't have all the other contacts in their system. For people that need it: | Settings |- Chat | |- Shar…

I would imagine that the issue that people have here isn't so much that you can hide from other users, but whether or not you can hide your information from the company behind Signal. I'd assume that if you can't hide from the company, then you can't hide from the US government. We know that you can extract messages from a compromised phone because they aren't encrypted at rest. Which I guess would mean that even if you have disappearing messages and similar, your messages could proably still be extracted from a group chat with a comprimised user in it.

If we go full tinfoil, then do you really trust Apple and Google to keep your Signal keys on your device safe from the US government?

It's probably not that bad, but I do know that we're having some serious discussions on Signal here in Europe because it's not necessarily the secure platform we used to think it was. Then again, our main issue is probably that we don't have a secure phone platform with a way to securely certify applications (speaking from a national safety, not personal privacy point of view).

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#662
post #643

What is it like in the US these days? I'm on the outside (occasionally) looking in, and it looks like something out of European history class! The ice seem to have roughly the same priorities and roughly the same methodology as the SA had in the beginning. Is stuff really as bad as it looks or are media somehow exaggerating things? I mean I saw the pretti videos and it certainly seems to corroborate what media is say…

[flagged]

This is simply not true.

Some people are investigated because they spread lies, insults and threats. Things that would be investigated (and punished) as well, if done "off line".

The freedom of speech does not mean "freedom to harass, threat or insult people".

The oppression of free speech seems to be happening much more in the USA, where you are not allowed to criticize the politics of the ruling party any more.

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#663

What is it like in the US these days? I'm on the outside (occasionally) looking in, and it looks like something out of European history class! The ice seem to have roughly the same priorities and roughly the same methodology as the SA had in the beginning. Is stuff really as bad as it looks or are media somehow exaggerating things? I mean I saw the pretti videos and it certainly seems to corroborate what media is say…

> Is stuff really as bad as it looks or are media somehow exaggerating things?

If you think what you've seen is bad, consider how bad the stuff you don't see is, and then consider how bad it is for those who aren't the type to post on HN.

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#664

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Isn't this the exact scenario those arguments were talking about? Have all the second amendment supporters been employed by ice/agree with what they're doing, or was it just empty talk? It was never really a practical idea, more a sort of latent threat that has proven to be ineffective. Also, yeah, the "don't tread on me" folks mostly aren't very principaled and don't mind authoritarian actions so long as they're d…

As a footnote, it was also written at a time when a bunch of guys with muskets could face down another bunch of guys with muskets. When one side has tanks and attack helicopters and training and outnumbers you a hundred to one it doesn't really work any more.

That would explain why it was so easy for the US to suppress insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan...

It's actually rather difficult to think of tyrannical regimes which persisted against an armed citizenry in the long term.

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#666

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Isn't this the exact scenario those arguments were talking about? Have all the second amendment supporters been employed by ice/agree with what they're doing, or was it just empty talk? It was never really a practical idea, more a sort of latent threat that has proven to be ineffective. Also, yeah, the "don't tread on me" folks mostly aren't very principaled and don't mind authoritarian actions so long as they're d…

As a footnote, it was also written at a time when a bunch of guys with muskets could face down another bunch of guys with muskets. When one side has tanks and attack helicopters and training and outnumbers you a hundred to one it doesn't really work any more.

It also applied to other things existing at that time, like warships, canister shot in cannons or machine guns.

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#667
post #643

What is it like in the US these days? I'm on the outside (occasionally) looking in, and it looks like something out of European history class! The ice seem to have roughly the same priorities and roughly the same methodology as the SA had in the beginning. Is stuff really as bad as it looks or are media somehow exaggerating things? I mean I saw the pretti videos and it certainly seems to corroborate what media is say…

[flagged]

[flagged]

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#668

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Isn't this the exact scenario those arguments were talking about? Have all the second amendment supporters been employed by ice/agree with what they're doing, or was it just empty talk? It was never really a practical idea, more a sort of latent threat that has proven to be ineffective. Also, yeah, the "don't tread on me" folks mostly aren't very principaled and don't mind authoritarian actions so long as they're d…

I see a lot from the left about how right-wingers are supposedly hypocritical on gun control. However, concrete examples of hypocrisy are rarely provided. In terms of actual concrete statements, what I'm seeing from gun rights people like Thomas Massie and the NRA is consistent with previous stances: https://xcancel.com/NRA/status/2015227627464728661#m https://xcancel.com/RepThomasMassie/status/20155711073281848... I…

Massie is the odd man out out of 1000s of Republican politicians in being willing to publicly criticize his own party. He is very not typical. Everybody else marches in lockstep with whatever insanity trump puts out.

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#669

What is it like in the US these days? I'm on the outside (occasionally) looking in, and it looks like something out of European history class! The ice seem to have roughly the same priorities and roughly the same methodology as the SA had in the beginning. Is stuff really as bad as it looks or are media somehow exaggerating things? I mean I saw the pretti videos and it certainly seems to corroborate what media is say…

Most cosplayers exit when they meet a real villain

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#670
post #643

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

This is simply not true. Some people are investigated because they spread lies, insults and threats. Things that would be investigated (and punished) as well, if done "off line". The freedom of speech does not mean "freedom to harass, threat or insult people". The oppression of free speech seems to be happening much more in the USA, where you are not allowed to criticize the politics of the ruling party any more.

Except it does mean exactly that if you have money
Post reply on HN