Founder of telegram arrested in france

Nemiyen said:
I guess the only solution is to not allow encryption.
Click to expand...
While we're at it why not ban maths and pens & paper.

Encryption dates back thousands of years, you can't not allow the use of an algorithm just in case someone uses it to convert plaintext into ciphertext, it's something anyone with the ability to speak or write can do.
 
Last edited:
Nemiyen said:
I guess the only solution is to not allow encryption.
Click to expand...
you realise I could encrypt a text message on here right? what are OCUK going to do ban me because they can't read it?

What if someone uses secret code to talk.... should we jail them ?


my thoughts can't be read either maybe we should outlaw them.


Governments want to control things they have no rights to restrict, in their interests not ours.



our country now does the exact same things that our country used to mock dictatorships and China for.... we just copy them now, it doesn't matter how invasive something is the sheep just accept it, like AI cameras in supermarkets so you don't even need a "loyalty card" anymore



Maybe we should ban envelopes, because it's like encrypting a letter right.... why shouldn't everyone be able to read it? we have to decrypt all communication because 2% of the worlds messages "maybe "illegal"


we don't know whos robbing houses, so we have to search every house to find out who the 5% of burglars are.


It's not all men but we don't know who the killers are... lets lock them all up.. oh that was actually a thing... trying to claim men should have a curfew to make women feel safe.

seems like the exact same childish parental logic.


our country doesn't govern, it parents now.


Colonel_Klinck said:
or because its full of child porn, drug sales, weapons sales and they refuse to moderate it? Oh and countries should be going after the owners off all the social media apps that don't remove all those things off their apps.
Click to expand...
so is the internet your on now! WE MUST DESTROY THE INTERNET TO KEEP YOU SAFE"!


NoNNYFm.png
 
Last edited:
The big stick used to push the whole "backdoor" to E2EE argument is generally terrorism and child protection... Of course its cynically used to get people to accept it through the "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" crap i.e. if you are against monitoring/removal/back door access to E2EE then you must either be a terrorist or a pedo :rolleyes:
 
Richie said:
Of course its cynically used to get people to accept it through the "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" crap i.e
Click to expand...
I'll just leave this hear... :)
www.openrightsgroup.org

Responding to “Nothing to hide, Nothing to fear”

This powerful sentence does many things: It encourages a complete trust in state powers – that you will never face wrongful suspicion or misuse of powers, for only the guilty are affected by mass surveillance.
www.openrightsgroup.org www.openrightsgroup.org
 
Colonel_Klinck said:
So countries shouldn't be able to regulate companies operating on their soil who's platforms are used for child porn and criminal activity?
Click to expand...
They should be able to but we're not really talking about that, we're talking about what end users do. Should water, gas, and electric companies be held responsible if someone uses what they supply for a criminal activity? How about if someone used a platform like a shop to buy a knife and kill people with it, should that shop be held responsible?

Don't get me wrong as i think companies who operate platforms like shops, ISPs, even messaging apps should take reasonable steps to ensure their platform is not being abused, not being used for criminal activity, but where do you draw the line. What are reasonable steps, especially when your reason for being is respecting your customers right to privacy.
 
Last edited:
Murphy said:
Don't get me wrong as i think companies who operate platforms like shops, ISPs, even messaging apps should take reasonable steps to ensure their platform is not being abused, not being used for criminal activity, but where do you draw the line. What are reasonable steps, especially when your reason for being is respecting your customers right to privacy.
Click to expand...

That's the thing, where do you draw the line.

This is going to be interesting as it does seem a bit of a stretch from the French prosecutors. There seems to be more going on here than meets the eye.
 
Well Zucc and co at least attempt to self-regulate their dumpster fires, Telegram does not and will not by principle do so regardless of what the law says.

With the direction that legislators are taking with things like the Online Safety Bill this is surely a bare minimum for a warning shot to others by using someone that is effectively persona non grata already. Since merely blocking/banning the app is irrelevant the nuclear option is all that remains assuming of course that this is a genuine attempt to enforce the law as they could easily be doing this cynically to 180 the legislative direction.
 
Last edited:
Murphy said:
They should be able to but we're not really talking about that, we're talking about what end users do. Should water, gas, and electric companies be held responsible if someone uses what they supply for a criminal activity? How about if someone used a platform like a shop to buy a knife and kill people with it, should that shop be held responsible?

Don't get me wrong as i think companies who operate platforms like shops, ISPs, even messaging apps should take reasonable steps to ensure their platform is not being abused, not being used for criminal activity, but where do you draw the line. What are reasonable steps, especially when your reason for being is respecting your customers right to privacy.
Click to expand...
You cannot reason with him because His position isn't rational and he made it clear on the front page.

It fascinating watching certain people mindlessly cheer as the country (the west in general) becomes more and more Authoritarian, because they seem to think sticking it to people they don't like, won't come back to bite them in the ass.

The child porn stuff is simply a trojan horse for what the government actually wants and that is control.
 
Last edited:
Murphy said:
They should be able to but we're not really talking about that, we're talking about what end users do. Should water, gas, and electric companies be held responsible if someone uses what they supply for a criminal activity? How about if someone used a platform like a shop to buy a knife and kill people with it, should that shop be held responsible?

Don't get me wrong as i think companies who operate platforms like shops, ISPs, even messaging apps should take reasonable steps to ensure their platform is not being abused, not being used for criminal activity, but where do you draw the line. What are reasonable steps, especially when your reason for being is respecting your customers right to privacy.
Click to expand...

If selling knives is illegal then the platform should take steps if its happening within the borders of that country. We are talking about child porn, money laundering, drugs and weapons sales. Those are illegal in most countries and imo the platform should be expected to remove any such activity and work with authorities to identify anyone within there borders that is carrying out such acts. Section 230 was IIRC about these companies not being held responsible for their customers speech, child porn etc has moved a long long way from what this was intended for imo.
 
Chuk_Chuk said:
You cannot reason with him because His position isn't rational and he made it clear on the front page.

It fascinating watching certain people mindlessly cheer as the country (the west in general) becomes more and more Authoritarian, because they seem to think sticking it to people they don't like, won't come back to bite them in the ass.

The child porn stuff is simply a trojan horse for what the government actually wants and that is control.
Click to expand...

Trying to prevent child porn being distributed and expecting these platforms to aid authorities in identifying perpetrators is irrational :rolleyes: Tbh your post sounds irrational.
 
Chuk_Chuk said:
It fascinating watching certain people mindlessly cheer as the country (the west in general) becomes more and more Authoritarian, because they seem to think sticking it to people they don't like, won't come back to bite them in the ass.

The child porn stuff is simply a trojan horse for what the government actually wants and that is control.
Click to expand...
ITS A MATRIX ATTACK!!!!!!!!!!
You sound absolutely off your rocker.
 
Last edited:
Colonel_Klinck said:
If selling knives is illegal then the platform should take steps if its happening within the borders of that country. We are talking about child porn, money laundering, drugs and weapons sales. Those are illegal in most countries and imo the platform should be expected to remove any such activity and work with authorities to identify anyone within there borders that is carrying out such acts. Section 230 was IIRC about these companies not being held responsible for their customers speech, child porn etc has moved a long long way from what this was intended for imo.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree but what step do you expect a company to take that doesn't know if its customers are doing those things.
 
Last edited:
Murphy said:
I don't disagree but what step do you expect a company to take that doesn't know if its customers are doing those things.
Click to expand...

Some steps. If reporting is true Telegram refuses to take any steps. Exactly what steps is way above my pay grade. At least Meta and Twitter take some steps to remove such content but imo they should be working much harder at it. Platform owners shouldn't be given a pass on this because they claim not to be publishers. Legislation needs to be updated as the likes of Section 230 is so out of date for what the internet has become.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom