I ask because I think the rhetoric on the "allow exceptional access to law enforcement" side of the debate is far better, and I'm curious what that nerd herd can bring to bear here rhetorically. (Remember on substance I am a true believer, don't burn me on sharpened stake etc.)
-
-
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/19/world/americas/mexico-spyware-anticrime.html … Plenty of stories like this out there. Might be misunderstanding your question.
-
Yeah, I think you're raising a different issue. E2E is irrelevant once you have malware on your device.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
I dont want my network mining my data and selling it to marketing companies, which is a thing now.
-
Who does this now? I am confused
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Companies can misuse the data for nefarious ends. E.g. Facebook could spy on someone who they dislike
-
They could do this with a targeted user update in an E2E world, no?
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
- Show replies
-
-
-
harms? - right to privacy is moot if tools to enforce it are illegal - cost of safekeeping user gen data is huge. - not having it can literally cost thousands of people around the world their livelihoods - making juggling numbers illegal doesn't make the tech to do so go away
-
Rebuttals: - right to privacy has always had limits imposed by law - cost is already being borne by the large tech companies - I don't follow this one - tech will become niche and make it easier to identify criminals, a la TOR
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.