3 ms·

I don't think it's realistic to assume that there will be a very large number of tiny Matrix servers that stand out. It's far more likely that there will be a c

I don't think it's realistic to assume that there will be a very large number of tiny Matrix servers that stand out. It's far more likely that there will be a couple of big ones and some midsize ones that most people use. Each of them can obviously become a target, but they will be in various different jurisdictions and it's easy to create new ones linked to all the rest of them. If you think that E2EE is not under heavy political fire then please read what our governments are demanding from tech companies. This is not limited to companies that are "choosing what is communicated and by who". On the contrary, governments are demanding that companies monitor what is communicated and by who: International statement: End-to-end encryption and public safety https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/international-statement-end-to-end-encryption-and-public-safety/international-statement-end-to-end-encryption-and-public-safety-accessible-version https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/international-sta...

tialaramex 5y ago
That "International Statement" basically says "We wish facts weren't true". But, like, too bad they are. Notice that it doesn't say they acknowledge the reality and so, fuck it, they'll just violate Human Rights and "materially weaken or limit security systems", instead they say well, surely we can avoid that and yet still get the same outcome. Nope. That's not how facts work. Writing long letters deploring the rules might work if you're up against the resident's association, local town council, or even a court of law, but Mother Nature couldn't give a shit what you think about her rules.