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

731–740 of 1001 posts

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#731

Post by zahlman »

trhway wrote: post #553
mw888 wrote: post #523

There seems to be wild speculation about freedom of speech rights or hacking Signal. The FBI simply joined groupchats and read them. This is trivial stuff.

>The FBI simply i don't think an investigation by FBI has ever been "simply" to the subjects of such an investigation. And to show bang-for-the-buck the "simply reading chat" officers would have to bring at least some fish, i.e. federal charges, from such a reading expedition. In general it sounds very familiar - any opposition is a crime of impeding and obstruction. Just like in Russia where any opposition is a crim…

> any opposition is a crime of impeding and obstruction

No; conspiracy to impede and obstruct is a crime.

If you are about to do something I don't want you to do, but which is lawful for you to do, 1A covers me saying "hey, don't do that". It does not cover me physically positioning myself in a way that prevents you from doing it. And if you happen to be an LEO and the thing you're about to do is a law enforcement action, it would be unlawful for me to adopt such positioning. It is unlawful even if I only significantly impede you.

And ICE are federal LEO.

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#732

Post by 0xDEAFBEAD »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #728
0xDEAFBEAD wrote: post #724

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also consider that there are 340 million people in the US. With that sort of population size, you can construct whatever narrative you want out of daily video clips of 1-in-a-million events. >the type to post on HN. When's the last time you saw a Trump supporter on this site? The userbase here is considerably further left than a very left-wing state such as California. That will very much be reflected in what gets po…

Most techies are libertarians and/or moderates. They definitely live in liberal hot spots, but they aren’t going out of their way to address social wrongs and protest. Heck, most Californians are moderate, mostly concerned about making money and living the good life, the only reason they are called liberal at all is because Pete Wilson alienated most of the states Hispanics from the Republican Party in an ill planned…

I don't think HN is representative of techies, especially not when discussing politics.

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#733

Post by 8note »

0xDEAFBEAD wrote: post #664
pseudohadamard wrote: post #659

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

the insurgencies in Afghanistan at least were difficult to suppress because they based of out pakistan, a supposed american ally and notable nuclear power.

to actually do the job of taking out the taliban would require going into pakistan to stop them in their bases.

in iraq, the insurgency was the former iraqi military, not just random citizens with small arms

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#734

Post by zahlman »

lynndotpy wrote: post #588
mw888 wrote: post #523

There seems to be wild speculation about freedom of speech rights or hacking Signal. The FBI simply joined groupchats and read them. This is trivial stuff.

More specifically, right-wing agitators joined the chats and posted screenshots online.

[flagged]

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#735

Post by zahlman »

notepad0x90 wrote: post #671

Keep in mind that with secure messaging, if the other side gets compromised, your chats with them are compromised. This seems obvious, but with signal groups of a large size, they're effectively public groups. Signal insists on using your phone number too, refusing user ids or anything that will make analysis hard. Don't use Signal for organizing anything of this sort, I promise you'll regret it. I've heard people ha…

No cryptography will protect a group that allows a traitor to join. The fundamental problem is vetting, and you really just can't do that remotely.

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#736

Post by watwut »

zahlman wrote: post #715
idle_zealot wrote: post #656

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> to follow federal agents around, harass them, and prevent them from doing their jobs. That’s textbook Obstruction of Justice. It is illegal to prevent an officer from doing their job. Filming officiers performing their jobs is not obstruction, even if it does make them uncomfortable. If it makes their jobs harder that's only because they know what they're doing is unpopular and don't want to be known to have done i…

> Filming officiers performing their jobs is not obstruction This is irrelevant, because many people have been observed physically obstructing officers, whether or not they were filming at the time. > If it makes their jobs harder Have you heard the constant blowing of whistles in these videos? Did you know that protesters have organized the mass 3d-printing and distribution of these whistles ( https://www.minnpost.c…

First you are lying. Second, noise is not an obstruction. It is ok and legal to produce whistles.

What is not legal is point guns at journalists, beat people who record you on the phones and shoot people in the back because they had phone in hand and you are frustrated. What is not legal is to throw pepper spray at people who are no threat. One gotta love the "they mass produce whistles" as a grave accusation while ICE men literally openly threaten to kill people who are no threat. Or kill them and then are proud of their murdering colleagues.

> I'm not mistaken in my understanding that Tim Walz is a Democrat, am I? The one making public speeches falsely claiming that ICE aren't LEO and encouraging "peaceful protest"

Yes, he had good speeches.

> without mentioning anything about obstruction of justice or resisting arrest?

Lol, heavily armed cowards jump at observer, 8 on one, there is no resistance and then they call it resisting arrest.

> For that matter, exactly what do you mean by "abolishing ICE"? Should it not be replaced? Should immigration law not be enforced? Should the USA allow everyone to reside within its borders who wishes to do so, with no barriers to entry?

ICE is basically a violent gang with impossible to reform culture. You dont hire gangmembers to do law enforcement. It needs to be abolished and people in it need to be banned from working in law enforcement.

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#737

Post by onjectic »

idle_zealot wrote: post #654
amarant wrote: post #632

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…

> 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…

> The Second Amendment was written so that the US could avoid having a standing federal army and quickly gather up defense forces from States as necessary when attacked.

Too narrow. It secures an individual right, not a federal mobilization clause.

> 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?

Only if you think the second amendment is an on demand partisan defense force. It is not. It is a personal guarantee and a reserve of capacity, not a subscription service where “second amendment supporters” are obligated to show up on cue.

> It was never really a practical idea, more a sort of latent threat that has proven to be ineffective.

“Latent” is largely the point. Deterrence is not measured by constant use, and a right is not refuted by the fact that strangers do not take on extreme personal risk to prove it to you. The first line checks are still speech, courts, elections, oversight. This right exists for when those fail.

> Exactly what the constitution was written to prevent. I guess they did a bad job.

If power has drifted, enforce the constraints. It is the second amendment, placed immediately after speech and assembly, not the third or the tenth. Do not redefine the right into irrelevance and call that proof it failed.

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#738

Post by dns_snek »

themafia wrote: post #709
eleventyseven wrote: post #582

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Protesting is a fundamental human right and obligation. It is something that you should do as casually as you would voting, volunteering, and taking out the garbage: something you do from time to time when the moment demands it. See also: https://enwp.org/Chilling_effect

[flagged]

> No. It's not. Governments are not natural. So you have no "fundamental" rights here.

You could make the same moot point about all societal laws. Fundamental rights are determined by the constitution, the UN declaration of human rights, as well as any other local charters.

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#739

Post by zahlman »

hedayet wrote: post #111

With all the predatory tech Palantir has produced, it won't take more than a few minutes for FBI to start taking actions, IF they had anything tangible. This is just an intimidation tactic to stop people talking (chatting)

I can easily think of reasons why an intelligence agency might not want to act immediately against members of a group they're interested in, simply because they've managed to identify those members.

I'm sure that people who actually work in intelligence agencies could think of more reasons.

Re: FBI is investigating Minnesota Signal chats tracking ICE

#740

Post by 15155 »

amarant wrote: post #632

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…

> As a European I'm also somewhat confused. I always thought that the reason the second amendment was made into such a big deal was because Americans felt they needed to be able to protect themselves in case the government ran amok.

Americans, yes - not illegal immigrant invaders. As it would turn out, American citizens aren't ready to die for these people just yet.

Post reply on HN