←back to thread

713 points greenburger | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
christina97 ◴[] No.44289755[source]
There’s something particularly paternalistic about this statement from the PM: “Your personal messages, calls and statuses, they will remain end-to-end encrypted”.
replies(4): >>44290025 #>>44290140 #>>44294064 #>>44296250 #
blitzar ◴[] No.44290025[source]
Any man who must say, "I am the King", is no true king.

Any tech company who must say, "we don't harvest your information", is a tech company that harvests your information.

replies(1): >>44293422 #
gruez ◴[] No.44293422[source]
Signal also claims the same:

> We can't read your messages or listen to your calls, and no one else can either.

Should we be suspicious of Signal as well?

replies(5): >>44293465 #>>44293484 #>>44293857 #>>44296208 #>>44352265 #
selfhoster11 ◴[] No.44293484[source]
Signal isn't backed by a global data gathering conglomerate, so no.
replies(1): >>44293617 #
gruez ◴[] No.44293617[source]
You're right, they're funded by something far more sinister - the US government.

More to the point, I thought the principle was "Any man who must say, "I am the King", is no true king."? That seems to leave no room for hedging, like only distrusting "global data gathering conglomerate" or whatever. If you're have to do a holistic assessment of an organization's governance structure and incentives, you're basically admitting that witty one-liners like the above are pointless, which was my point.

replies(1): >>44295839 #
1. worik ◴[] No.44295839[source]
> they're funded by something far more sinister - the US government.

What does that mean?