6 ms·

Not one but several “close the tab” level dumb claims: -that you cannot be open source if you do not instantly share every change -that the nsa funded signal

Not one but several “close the tab” level dumb claims: -that you cannot be open source if you do not instantly share every change -that the nsa funded signal -that you can bribe the New Yorker magazine to write a profile about you -that Facebook Messenger is as secure as Signal I don’t trust dijit.

dijit 3y ago
Ironically I tell people all the time not to trust me. I run an IRC network (and have for 15 years), and I tell people often to use OTR in DMS primarily because I shouldn't be trusted. I definitely do not tell people to install my client and forsake all other networks. > -that you can bribe the New Yorker magazine to write a profile about you Oh that's definitely true; though I wasn't saying bribe; Did you know those "30 under 30" lists, you have to apply to be on those. It helps if you're rich, but you don't technically have to pay. It's like this with a lot of media. I have been in the room when discussing paying for PR pieces on our senior staff, especially the CEO in top magazines. Truthfully you hire a PR agency and "things happen". > -that Facebook Messenger is as secure as Signal Why are they not? > -that you cannot be open source if you do not instantly share every change You are not, since nobody can bloody run the software themselves anyway, and the entire point is transparency.
- md_ 3y ago
  > Oh that's definitely true; though I wasn't saying bribe; Did you know those "30 under 30" lists, you have to apply to be on those. It helps if you're rich, but you don't technically have to pay. It's like this with a lot of media. I mean, you wrote, "From everything I personally know about the media, articles like that are usually paid for, though almost never directly by the person being profiled." This is, frankly, a stupid claim, though I think from your profile you are probably German or Austrian and thus might not really know which news outlets are reliable. As a perhaps helpful analogy, the New Yorker is roughly like Der Spiegel or Die Zeit, only more respected. (That's not to say they don't have misses; Ken Auletta's profile of Elizabeth Holmes comes to mind.) The prospect that you can pay for coverage--and as an aside, I don't think The New Yorker has ever run "30 under 30" lists--is rather laughable. > You are not, since nobody can bloody run the software themselves anyway, and the entire point is transparency. Er, what are you talking about? https://signal.org/blog/reproducible-android/ https://signal.org/blog/reproducible-android/ I don't know how to say this nicely, but your post doesn't have a strong connection to facts.
  - dijit 3y ago
    I'm British but reside in Sweden and work for a German company, it's possible I don't know all things about American culture- I've only worked for one American company. What I'm referring to was a french company and they were talking about US papers. the 30-under-30 thing is Forbes, I have always considered them reputable, perhaps I am mistaken. The reproducible builds website; is; as previously mentioned a really nice looking page which basically says: It won't be reproducible even if you follow these steps. I literally said: "it looks good in a google search, but there is nothing of substance since they say in the article itself that it will not be reproducible", that "please don't send us messages about how it's not reproducible"; they say it's because of the shared libraries and that some parts are actually reproducible.
    - md_ 3y ago
      > the 30-under-30 thing is Forbes, I have always considered them reputable, perhaps I am mistaken. No, Forbes is a shithole. https://www.entrepreneur.com/growing-a-business/did-someone-offer-to-write-about-you-in-exchange-for-money/362280 https://www.entrepreneur.com/growing-a-business/did-someone-... The New Yorker is not a shithole, and don't take money for articles. Maybe you want to, like, correct your blog post? Honestly, the claim makes you sound dumb. > The reproducible builds website; is; as previously mentioned a really nice looking page which basically says: It won't be reproducible even if you follow these steps. I don't know what you mean. Are you referring to the NDK portions? And if so, does the critical stuff (key verification, encryption) happen in Java or in native code? > "please don't send us messages about how it's not reproducible" Huh? Where did they say that?
      - dijit 3y ago
        Appreciate the ad hominem, let's continue. Even if I take, for absolute fact that you cannot possibly hire a PR firm or spend enough in marketing to get a puff piece about you in a magazine; you are glossing over the entire point I am making. Someone is telling me to like this guy. Someone is telling me that he's a saint, a hero, a steward of the future. Someone truly want's me to think that. I'll say it again because you didn't catch it: none of these issues are nails in a coffin, when placed together they paint a particular picture. I can't unsee that picture, and arguing over semantics doesn't change the core argument at all. I absolutely will not redact that statement because it is true that you can buy your way into magazines, either directly or indirectly. Whether the New Yorker is entirely immune to being convinced to write profiles like this: even if no money directly changes hands, is irrelevant. ----- > the Signal Android codebase includes some native shared libraries that we employ for voice calls (WebRTC, etc). At the time this native code was added, there was no Gradle NDK support yet, so the shared libraries aren’t compiled with the project build. > Getting the Gradle NDK support set up and making its output reproducible will likely be more difficult. > Please don’t freak out > Just to head off the inevitable deluge of GPG-encrypted emails with dramatic subject lines, we are not doing this in response to any kind of legal threat or pressure. This is just a weekend hack; please don’t make us regret it. tl;dr: it's not reproducible with shared libraries, or gradle and it was just a hack, please don't make them regret doing it. Oh, and did you actually run through the steps? Or is it merely enough that having them listed makes you trust them?
- eduction 3y ago
  > Oh that's definitely true; though I wasn't saying bribe; Did you know those "30 under 30" lists, you have to apply to be on those. The New Yorker is a storied magazine that has never had anything like that. Forbes runs those lists, I believe. I am not particularly a fan of the New Yorker any longer, and some media ignorance is forgivable. But to make a libelous sloppy claim on this basis is the height of hypocrisy and recklessness. Do you notice how people have to waste time repeatedly rebutting your pig ignorant claims? I am a free speech advocate but your behavior is the reason libel laws exist.

dijit 3y ago

Ironically I tell people all the time not to trust me. I run an IRC network (and have for 15 years), and I tell people often to use OTR in DMS primarily because I shouldn't be trusted. I definitely do not tell people to install my client and forsake all other networks. > -that you can bribe the New Yorker magazine to write a profile about you Oh that's definitely true; though I wasn't saying bribe; Did you know those "30 under 30" lists, you have to apply to be on those. It helps if you're rich, but you don't technically have to pay. It's like this with a lot of media. I have been in the room when discussing paying for PR pieces on our senior staff, especially the CEO in top magazines. Truthfully you hire a PR agency and "things happen". > -that Facebook Messenger is as secure as Signal Why are they not? > -that you cannot be open source if you do not instantly share every change You are not, since nobody can bloody run the software themselves anyway, and the entire point is transparency.

md_ 3y ago
> Oh that's definitely true; though I wasn't saying bribe; Did you know those "30 under 30" lists, you have to apply to be on those. It helps if you're rich, but you don't technically have to pay. It's like this with a lot of media. I mean, you wrote, "From everything I personally know about the media, articles like that are usually paid for, though almost never directly by the person being profiled." This is, frankly, a stupid claim, though I think from your profile you are probably German or Austrian and thus might not really know which news outlets are reliable. As a perhaps helpful analogy, the New Yorker is roughly like Der Spiegel or Die Zeit, only more respected. (That's not to say they don't have misses; Ken Auletta's profile of Elizabeth Holmes comes to mind.) The prospect that you can pay for coverage--and as an aside, I don't think The New Yorker has ever run "30 under 30" lists--is rather laughable. > You are not, since nobody can bloody run the software themselves anyway, and the entire point is transparency. Er, what are you talking about? https://signal.org/blog/reproducible-android/ https://signal.org/blog/reproducible-android/ I don't know how to say this nicely, but your post doesn't have a strong connection to facts.
- dijit 3y ago
  I'm British but reside in Sweden and work for a German company, it's possible I don't know all things about American culture- I've only worked for one American company. What I'm referring to was a french company and they were talking about US papers. the 30-under-30 thing is Forbes, I have always considered them reputable, perhaps I am mistaken. The reproducible builds website; is; as previously mentioned a really nice looking page which basically says: It won't be reproducible even if you follow these steps. I literally said: "it looks good in a google search, but there is nothing of substance since they say in the article itself that it will not be reproducible", that "please don't send us messages about how it's not reproducible"; they say it's because of the shared libraries and that some parts are actually reproducible.
  - md_ 3y ago
    > the 30-under-30 thing is Forbes, I have always considered them reputable, perhaps I am mistaken. No, Forbes is a shithole. https://www.entrepreneur.com/growing-a-business/did-someone-offer-to-write-about-you-in-exchange-for-money/362280 https://www.entrepreneur.com/growing-a-business/did-someone-... The New Yorker is not a shithole, and don't take money for articles. Maybe you want to, like, correct your blog post? Honestly, the claim makes you sound dumb. > The reproducible builds website; is; as previously mentioned a really nice looking page which basically says: It won't be reproducible even if you follow these steps. I don't know what you mean. Are you referring to the NDK portions? And if so, does the critical stuff (key verification, encryption) happen in Java or in native code? > "please don't send us messages about how it's not reproducible" Huh? Where did they say that?
    - dijit 3y ago
      Appreciate the ad hominem, let's continue. Even if I take, for absolute fact that you cannot possibly hire a PR firm or spend enough in marketing to get a puff piece about you in a magazine; you are glossing over the entire point I am making. Someone is telling me to like this guy. Someone is telling me that he's a saint, a hero, a steward of the future. Someone truly want's me to think that. I'll say it again because you didn't catch it: none of these issues are nails in a coffin, when placed together they paint a particular picture. I can't unsee that picture, and arguing over semantics doesn't change the core argument at all. I absolutely will not redact that statement because it is true that you can buy your way into magazines, either directly or indirectly. Whether the New Yorker is entirely immune to being convinced to write profiles like this: even if no money directly changes hands, is irrelevant. ----- > the Signal Android codebase includes some native shared libraries that we employ for voice calls (WebRTC, etc). At the time this native code was added, there was no Gradle NDK support yet, so the shared libraries aren’t compiled with the project build. > Getting the Gradle NDK support set up and making its output reproducible will likely be more difficult. > Please don’t freak out > Just to head off the inevitable deluge of GPG-encrypted emails with dramatic subject lines, we are not doing this in response to any kind of legal threat or pressure. This is just a weekend hack; please don’t make us regret it. tl;dr: it's not reproducible with shared libraries, or gradle and it was just a hack, please don't make them regret doing it. Oh, and did you actually run through the steps? Or is it merely enough that having them listed makes you trust them?
eduction 3y ago
> Oh that's definitely true; though I wasn't saying bribe; Did you know those "30 under 30" lists, you have to apply to be on those. The New Yorker is a storied magazine that has never had anything like that. Forbes runs those lists, I believe. I am not particularly a fan of the New Yorker any longer, and some media ignorance is forgivable. But to make a libelous sloppy claim on this basis is the height of hypocrisy and recklessness. Do you notice how people have to waste time repeatedly rebutting your pig ignorant claims? I am a free speech advocate but your behavior is the reason libel laws exist.