Yup, indeed.

https://youtu.be/RwK4HExiR20

From 00:20 on encryption. It would be funny if it weren't so dystopian.

> requires providers of encrypted communications to alter their products to ensure user messages are free of material that’s harmful to children.

Oh for f***'s sake, Lovejoy Arguments?? I swear, any time I hear about regulation "for the sake of the children", it's got to be conservatives. Every freaking time, they scapegoat the idea of child protection in order to effect overwatch or controls on people.

Sounds like the U.S. EARN IT Act.

I am of the opinion that Canada is making a mistake with this law.

Time will determine which one turns-out to be right.

I hope it turns-out to be Google’s mistake, but I suspect it will turn-out to be Canada’s.

Regardless, it will unfortunately be average people bearing the consequences of corporate greed and shortsightedness (that’s on both sides of this issue btw - Google’s and media organizations) regardless as usual.

Also if you drive through the E18 and E4 intersection in Kista you can’t miss it.

I replied to another comment of yours regarding encryption. But this statement you made gives much more clarity on your issue of "trust" in [insert company here].

Encryption works depending on it's implementation. Take AES for example. It's a standard that's wisely recognized and widely used by virtually everyone on the encryption scene. As a result, it's been tested, used in multitude of ways and is regularly attempted to be broken. That's because AES is the standard. Since this is the case, it's less likely to have side channel attack weakness due to it's wide spread application and audit.

Compare that to something like TwoFish. It's strong like AES and is built differently. You could use this method of encryption and likely be safe. However, it's not widely used. This means it's likely not audited or scrutinized as much as AES and since it's not used as much, it's implementation is also at higher risk of side channel attacks. Without players routinely executing TwoFish encryption, it's level of progress is much lower than AES by comparison. This doesn't mean TwoFish is necessarily inferior but that it doesn't have the "run time" that AES has.

They care in as much as they seem to believe that they alone will hold the keys and their own privacy would never be impinged. They're also very, very stupid.

“Military grade” as in outsourced to the cheapest source and likely to be hugely overpriced when delivered?

These days, when it’s encrypted, a significant amount of time has to be put into decryption. So significant that the decrypted material will be irrelevant. (65 million years later, it doesn’t matter)

Honestly take away the political figures in this discussion and this is much better for data privacy and right to forget. There's similar things for Reddit and frankly I think for an average person these things violate privacy in a way because they remove your right for Reddit to forget your data. I'm sure people would argue over this but the idea that we should archive everything everywhere all the time for everyone is not a comforting one to me personally. And while public figures are different usually there's no distinction made for these types of capabilities.

But they aren’t making them share desks. Still a better work culture than Google

It’s a feature not a bug.

> If you have been instructed to preserve documents of a given type for a given legal case

However, in this case the "given type" was "everything". But totally not overreach.

The modern equivalent of making the Yellow Pages pay you for the privilege of printing your ad in their phone book.

[removed]

Thank you for at least trying, but after reading all the cited sources, none of them official quote Microsoft as saying Windows 10 is the last Windows, the first article comes the closest with actual quote from Microsoft talking about Windows as a service and a change in the way they make their revenue stream, but the last two are just third party misquote of the original developer as I quoted above.

But where is the proof that the app code is the same as GitHub code? 🤔 do they provide some hash or something?

That is not the issue here. Google steals the traffic of websites by embedding their content into google home page.

Christopher Dorner.

Bruh.. Lol

You clearly don't understand how encryption works to be commenting on the subject matter. Especially when you openly admitted:

> I'm not sure how exactly Signal and these other messaging apps implement their encryption

For starters, both Signal and WhatsApp use the Signal Protocol: an encryption standard that was engineered by Signal in-house. Also, Signal is open source meaning that anyone can verify their source code on how the app was constructed. Signal wouldn't tamper with their code and even if they did, Signal is set up in such a way that any adversary that wanted to snoop would need the device itself to discover the messages.

Do more research my friend.

[deleted]

the work from home people don't wanna hear it apparently

it’s in the wikipedia, have your pick of the cited sources

https://i.imgur.com/Vpw1N5Z.jpg

Bender is evil bender?

Three prime ministers in a year and a half. It’s a shit show.

Just donated to Signal for the first time off the back of this news.

google has been making record profits, these layoffs are to appease wall st which wants to see even bigger profits.