When the F.B.I. arrested several Oath Keepers for rioting at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, one of its primary pieces of evidence was messages on Signal.
DING DING!
The privacy of individuals must be respected above all else, come what may. If terrorists or child abusers or other criminals use the app
The groomers suddenly care about 'child abuse' when they can use it as an excuse to take away your privacy. For your own good, and for the children, of course.
What’s more, the company’s proposition that if anyone has access to data, then many unauthorized people probably will have access to that data is false. This response reflects a lack of faith in good governance
The man lacks faith in the government.
BURN HIM!!!!!!
They are a small group of people who govern these powerful tools, and they are not accountable in the way that, say, a democratically elected government is.
Wow, look at all that 'accountability' of the 'democratically elected' governments!
Whether law enforcement should tap our phones on the condition that a warrant is obtained is, at the very least, worthy of public discussion. Signal has unilaterally decided for us all.
Huh, if a company decides to censor me, that's up to the company. But if a company decides to safeguard its users' privacy, all of a sudden, it's very bad to "unilaterally" decide that for everyone.
How come this only goes one way?
Instead, we have a technologically driven shift of power to ideological individuals and organizations whose lack of appreciation for moral nuance and good governance puts us all at risk.
Show on the doll where the bad privacy touched you.
By Reid Blackman
Mr. Blackman is an adviser to government and corporations on digital ethics.
If you have wretches like this advising you on ethics... damn.
Whether law enforcement should tap our phones on the condition that a warrant is obtained is, at the very least, worthy of public discussion. Signal has unilaterally decided for us all.
HOLY SHIT. Bwhahahaha.
Instead, we have a technologically driven shift of power to ideological individuals and organizations whose lack of appreciation for moral nuance and good governance puts us all at risk.
As you said about it only going one way...it's fine if private companies have ideology in one direction, but the other way is BAD. It's fine if companies team up with the government to violate people's rights en masse, but saying you don't want that to be possible or it might happen (which it never does, disregard that it is happening) you're an evil conspiracy theorist.
No, technically they're saying Gubmint should be able to monitor, with a warrant, because Democracy, or something.
The government spying on you is the will of the people. Anyone providing privacy that would make it harder for the government to spy on its users is Bad.
The Twitter Files showed Nosering Bin Laden being slightly less bad than you would expect. He seems to be genuinely in favor of not letting corps and governments decide what you say, plus privacy, and he's being attacked for it.
He's the one who turned Twitter into the woke shithole that Elon inherited. If he was genuinely against letting corps decide what you say he had plenty of time to act on it and he never did.
DING DING!
The groomers suddenly care about 'child abuse' when they can use it as an excuse to take away your privacy. For your own good, and for the children, of course.
The man lacks faith in the government.
BURN HIM!!!!!!
Wow, look at all that 'accountability' of the 'democratically elected' governments!
Huh, if a company decides to censor me, that's up to the company. But if a company decides to safeguard its users' privacy, all of a sudden, it's very bad to "unilaterally" decide that for everyone.
How come this only goes one way?
Show on the doll where the bad privacy touched you.
If you have wretches like this advising you on ethics... damn.
I see Jewishness in every sentence.
HOLY SHIT. Bwhahahaha.
As you said about it only going one way...it's fine if private companies have ideology in one direction, but the other way is BAD. It's fine if companies team up with the government to violate people's rights en masse, but saying you don't want that to be possible or it might happen (which it never does, disregard that it is happening) you're an evil conspiracy theorist.
No, technically they're saying Gubmint should be able to monitor, with a warrant, because Democracy, or something.
The government spying on you is the will of the people. Anyone providing privacy that would make it harder for the government to spy on its users is Bad.
Remember, it's (D)ifferent when they do it.
these creatures wouldn't know ethics if it bit them.
That's the WEF code word for managing people as battery hens.
The fact that butt boy Dorsey supports that app makes me more suspicious of it, not less.
The Twitter Files showed Nosering Bin Laden being slightly less bad than you would expect. He seems to be genuinely in favor of not letting corps and governments decide what you say, plus privacy, and he's being attacked for it.
He's the one who turned Twitter into the woke shithole that Elon inherited. If he was genuinely against letting corps decide what you say he had plenty of time to act on it and he never did.
The twitter files seem to show the employees maneuvered to exclude him from important decisions.
Jack was happy to vacation.
If you want an idea of what the FBI can get out of Signal, here you go.
https://signal.org/bigbrother/cd-california-grand-jury/
No need to get spied on by the google spy machine to read a signal website
This pussy uses a lot of words to say nothing at all.