AI is "not open in any sense," the battle over encryption is far from won, and Signal's principled (and uncompromising) approach may complicate
  • @DABDAEnglish
    40•9 months ago

    There’s a great (and short) video about encryption back-doors by CGP Grey: “Should all locks have keys? Phones, Castles, Encryption, and You.” (Piped link).

    “No matter how much we might wish it, there’s no way to build a digital lock that only angels can open and demons cannot. Anyone saying otherwise is either ignorant of the mathematics or less of an angel than they appear.”

    EDIT: I still hate you Piped bot.

      • @PloppEnglish
        12•9 months ago

        It’s ok PipedBot, I will always love you.

    • @AceticonEnglish
      2•9 months ago

      Even more generally than that, remember that daemons are fallen angels and that same thing happens outside the metaphorical world.

      So even if the mathematics allowed it, once something is out and being use with backdoored encryption sooner or later the “bad guys” will have the means to use it if only because of human nature.

  • moxEnglish
    33•9 months ago

    This article touches on three distinct issues. The first one is the misguided legislators who hope to get more accountability from tech companies (or to punish them) by creating encryption back-doors and restrictions. That part is worth reading and spreading, regardless of whether Signal is your tool of choice.

  • AlexEnglish
    18•9 months ago

    I certainly agree with a lot of that analysis. I also worry how signal continue to fund their app sustainably without compromising their users.

    • @mipadaituEnglish
      6•9 months ago

      How about we cut back on the misogyny.

        • @asdfasdfasdfEnglish
          -2•9 months ago

          IDK, I wouldn’t say calling someone hot is even objectification. You can respect someone who you consider smart and there dimensional and also think they’re hot.

          I’d say it’s just inappropriate.

      • gian English
        -1•9 months ago

        I agree he said it in the wrong way, but is now misogyny to acknoledge that in addition to being really smart she is also a nice looking woman ?

        • @mipadaituEnglish
          3•9 months ago

          It is wrong, because it’s makes it uncomfortable for women to be in power, or in the public eye.
          Every time we allow it, it normalizes the problem, and perpetuates it.

          She’s out there trying to make it harder for governments and corporations to abuse our personal data. We want to uplift THAT message, not reduce it to a discussion about her appearance.

          • gian English
            -2•9 months ago

            It is wrong, because it’s makes it uncomfortable for women to be in power, or in the public eye. Every time we allow it, it normalizes the problem, and perpetuates it.

            I don’t really think that woman in power positions or in the public eye are that easily offended by a compliment (or an insult).

            She’s out there trying to make it harder for governments and corporations to abuse our personal data. We want to uplift THAT message, not reduce it to a discussion about her appearance.

            I get that. I only said that maybe to call misogyny a compliment on the look of a woman on top of all her other qualities maybe it too much. “she is really smart” and “she is nice looking” are not mutually exclusive in a discussion.

            • @mipadaituEnglish
              2•9 months ago

              1 - It’s not just about HER. It’s all the other women who see her and see what’s actually being discussed in public about her.

              2 - It’s NOT A COMPLIMENT. She’s not looking at this thread and saying “wow, I’m glad that dude thinks I’m kind of hot.” it’s a whole group of people having a discussion about a very important product on the market, and someone trying to start a side conversation about appearance. It has no business being in this thread, and it makes half the population less welcoming to the discussion.