wonderingwanderer

They didn’t want to seem unfair or partisan leading up to an election.

So instead they publicly announced an investigation into Hillary Clinton a few days before the election, and then retracted it a week later…

She’s not even looking where she’s pointing and yet she’s got her finger on the trigger.

Weapons handling score 0/10

The world didn’t know the extent of the atrocities during the holocaust until after the nazis were defeated and the Allies found the concentration camps

Those in power didn’t care even then, and they still don’t. The only reason Bovino got fired was the optics. Not cause they killed a guy; because they got caught.

https://sopuli.xyz/post/40232627

One thing I’ve learned is that if it can be abused, the authorities will abuse it unless laws are passed to stop them. And even then they’ll try to change the laws or abuse it secretly.

If it’s sending 0.0kb of background data, then the client is not communicating clandestinely with the server.

I never claimed that it happens outside of an acute overdose. I said it can happen, which is factually true. I also said there’s no way to guarantee an addict won’t take a large enough dose to deprive their brain of oxygen. It happens. Pretending it doesn’t is harmful. The cause of death for most opioid overdoses is literally cardiac arrest.

In the clinical sense, doses are administered to stay within safe limits, so supplemental oxygen is not needed.

That’s so interesting. Data kind of blows my mind. Like, how could all that information travel over wires or through the air and not get mixed up with other information on its way to its destination?

So in other words, be clean-shaven, don’t have long hair, dress like a normie, don’t have a stutter, be known by everyone in your community, have enough money to donate a playground to a public park, and hope all the moms are having an okay day? Got it.

Is that vulnerable to an attack if a hacker gets their public key and intercepts the data traffic? Or can it only be used to encrypt but not decrypt?

Or are the added layers of complexity designed specifically to prevent that from happening?

This is why I like open-source, because people who know more about it than I do can check everything over and say whether it’s good.

It sounds like you’re contradicting yourself now. You’re right, signal is more secure because its source code is open-source and auditable. So what’s the issue? It seems you’ve been arguing otherwise, and you’re just now coming around to it without admitting that you were wrong in the first place.

The client-side app is also open-source and auditable, and you can monitor outgoing traffic on your devise to see whether the signal app is sending data that it shouldn’t. It sounds like people have verified that it doesn’t do that, but if you don’t want to take their word for it then why don’t you see for yourself?

Now I’m curious: how does the person you’re messaging get the same key to decrypt the message you send?

I’m genuinely curious.

The “exploit being used” is closed-source, proprietary code sending data where it says it doesn’t.

People have already explained to you how signal’s open-source, auditable, and reproducible code prevents the possibility of a similar exploit.

You’re the smug fool who doesn’t understand cybersecurity. How much is zuck paying you to say “signal’s just as bad as whatapp”?

You’re talking about E2E encryption as if it prevents side-channel attacks

That’s literally what E2E encryption does. In order to attack it from outside you would have to break the encryption itself, and modern encryption is so robust that it would require quantum computing to break, and that capability hasn’t been developed yet.

The only reason the other commenter’s words sound like spam to you is because you don’t understand it, which you plainly reveal when you say "(as long as there isn’t a backdoor in the published [audited] code)

You called it fatalistic bullshit to say RFK jr. has permanent brain damage…

Managed prescriptions are taken in safe doses. There’s no way to guarantee someone addicted to illicit opiates will stay below the threshold of dangerous consumption.

Even alcohol in large enough quantities kills brain cells. Stop pretending addiction is harmless, because it’s not helping addicts the way you seem to think it is.

I feel for you, and all the dads who play an active role in parenting, especially single dads. Like, how do you even take your own kid to the playground these days without getting the cops called on you?

I know it’s not socially acceptable to acknowledge the ways in which men struggle in society, but that’s something that needs to change.

Ken McCallum, the MI5 director general, previously warned of “clandestine, coercive or corruptive … interference activity”, and highlighted the case of Christine Lee, a lawyer whom MI5 issued a warning to MPs about in January 2022, accusing her of being engaged in “political interference activities” on behalf of the Chinese Communist Party.

How’s it feel being so obviously wrong?