Ulrich @ Ulrich @feddit.org

Posts

9

Comments

3,499

Joined

7 mo. ago

It's just you. There were mass protests across the country just a couple of weeks ago.

Unless you meant the senseless destruction of property.

They know what they're doing is wrong

Is that why the protestors wear them too?

Does it matter? How would you get access to such information?

Try Yunohost

You get a handful of results, after which you just get "recommended" AI slop shorts and completely irrelevant "suggestions".

If YT Red gave me the option to disable Shorts and "suggestions" I might pay for it but you can't pay your way out of this hellhole.

100,000 people check the news, one person is whistleblowing.

There are many many more people using Signal to yell at their kids to do the dishes or some shit. Not whistleblowing.

Thats a big red arrow pointing to only people sending encrypted messages.

Everyone is using encrypted messages...

I don't know everything. Just because it's not explicitly listed today doesn't mean it won't be tomorrow. This was just created yesterday. And it does the same thing that all of those listed apps do: facilitates private communication.

Sources for what, exactly? What is "fantasming"? The title of the article you posted is "Criminalization of encryption". The Guardian is using encryption to send messages, so why would they be exempt? In fact, why would any internet use at all not be criminalized? It's all encrypted.

Packet data has headers that can identify where it's coming from and where it's going to

Wouldn't you have to have some sort of MITM to be able to inspect that traffic?

This is also why something like Tor manages to circumvent packet sniffing

TOR is what their already-existing tip tool uses.

Like someone said the point is they can see the fact that you sent a secured message period. Not with the guardian app though.

The entire point of the article in the OP is that you can send secured messages with The Guardian app. 🤦‍♂️

Then you're also a terrorist if you use The Guardian 🤷‍♂️

which one would sell more

I mean they would charge a lot of money for the stripped down one because it doesn't allow them to monetize it on the back end, and the vast majority would continue using the resource-slurping ad-riddled one.

Google and Meta are monitoring the conversations using the device's microphone

I've heard this claim many times for decades but never seen any legitimate evidence.

The only evidence I've seen is accidental recordings from digital "assistants" who mishear the wake phrase. But those only last a couple seconds. Meta has no such assistant.

In addition, Apple and Google both have had mic indicators for when the mic is on and listening for a long time so they'd have to somehow compromise the operating system as well.

What's wrong with Apple Notes?

Your therapist can't even have a phone in the room?

It's called encryption

Use a different device? Use Molly? Use any number of other apps? What's to stop the MDM from blocking The Guardian app?

Say you’re trying to break a story, who are you going to message with signal?

...The Guardian?

Because you’re going to need to get that contact info somehow right?

Use your browser? These are strange questions.

Snowden is permanently stranded in Russia. That’s not exactly a great example of an anonymous source.

Did you notice that I used the past tense?

Yes, this is what most browsers do that are not Chrome or Edge.

Or it's just a perfectly normal thing that billions of people do every day?

Good