4 ms·

Facebook's plan is the opposite of WeChat. WeChat is strictly monitored, pervasively censored and rigorously controlled to align with official dogma, stifle ru

Facebook's plan is the opposite of WeChat. WeChat is strictly monitored, pervasively censored and rigorously controlled to align with official dogma, stifle rumors, suppress dissent and promote harmony. The new Facebook would be end-to-end encrypted so Facebook can't read messages even under court order. It will be physically impossible to monitor, censor or control how the platform is used and abused. Facebook lost control of the monster they created, and this is their solution - abdicate any responsibility whatsoever. I don't want the WeChat model, or the current Facebook model, or the new Facebook where their toxic waste is externalized to governments and the public to clean up. These are all anti-patterns.

magashna 8y ago
I'll believe it when it's been reviewed by not Facebook
bryan_w 8y ago
> I don't want the WeChat model, or the current Facebook model, or the new Facebook where their toxic waste is externalized to governments and the public to clean up. Well, what do you want? For people to not communicate?
- panarky 8y ago
  > For people to not communicate? Option 1: 100% state surveillance and control Option 2: Zero ability for platform operator to reduce the harm their platform inflicts Option 3: People cannot communicate Yep, those are the only choices, nothing else is possible.
parliament32 8y ago
>Facebook can't read messages even under court order Considering that FB controls the package distributions for the apps that actually handle the encryption/decryption, and they're all closed-source, it would be hilariously easy for them to be compelled to "forward any message send/received by users in badlist.txt to fbi.gov" or whatever you like. E2E is good, but frankly it doesn't do shit if the provider still controls both endpoints.
- panarky 8y ago
  > closed-source Focusing on the technical implementation of e2e is a distraction. For the sake of argument, let's assume that Facebook actually implements e2e and they really cannot read the cleartext or make it available to fbi.gov. My argument is that this is a dystopian outcome as bad or worse than WeChat's model of 100% state surveillance and control. It's a devious way for Facebook to avoid responsibility for the harm its platform amplifies and accelerates.

magashna 8y ago

I'll believe it when it's been reviewed by not Facebook

bryan_w 8y ago

> I don't want the WeChat model, or the current Facebook model, or the new Facebook where their toxic waste is externalized to governments and the public to clean up. Well, what do you want? For people to not communicate?

panarky 8y ago
> For people to not communicate? Option 1: 100% state surveillance and control Option 2: Zero ability for platform operator to reduce the harm their platform inflicts Option 3: People cannot communicate Yep, those are the only choices, nothing else is possible.

parliament32 8y ago

>Facebook can't read messages even under court order Considering that FB controls the package distributions for the apps that actually handle the encryption/decryption, and they're all closed-source, it would be hilariously easy for them to be compelled to "forward any message send/received by users in badlist.txt to fbi.gov" or whatever you like. E2E is good, but frankly it doesn't do shit if the provider still controls both endpoints.

panarky 8y ago
> closed-source Focusing on the technical implementation of e2e is a distraction. For the sake of argument, let's assume that Facebook actually implements e2e and they really cannot read the cleartext or make it available to fbi.gov. My argument is that this is a dystopian outcome as bad or worse than WeChat's model of 100% state surveillance and control. It's a devious way for Facebook to avoid responsibility for the harm its platform amplifies and accelerates.