4 ms·

I could be wrong, but my assumption is that tech companies with a lot of talent develop their own messaging apps for the execs and friends. Why would they risk

I could be wrong, but my assumption is that tech companies with a lot of talent develop their own messaging apps for the execs and friends. Why would they risk using a popular platform? The data could be sent via whatever medium, doesn't need to be ethernet. I also assume this is how most illegal collusion is done as well, unless someone wants to give me other data points.

banish-m4 2y ago
In-house tools are jobs programs for megacorps. "Why use COTS when you can grow a pyramid with something made internally?" More work = job security. Meta has Workplace, for example.
fao_ 2y ago
> my assumption is that tech companies with a lot of talent develop their own messaging apps for the execs and friends. err- i dont mean to be rude but, what gave you that assumption?
schmidtleonard 2y ago
It's not an app, it's the golf club. This is what golf clubs are for.
Aurornis 2y ago
> I could be wrong, but my assumption is that tech companies with a lot of talent develop their own messaging apps for the execs and friends. This is an incorrect assumption. E-mail and even SMS text messaging are heavily relied upon. This very story shows that Amazon execs were using Signal, not some custom application. If a company was found to have developed a custom in-house app that was exclusively used by executives and their friends, it would immediately become the central target of their investigation. > Why would they risk using a popular platform? I think the part you've missed is that if someone is discussing something sensitive or illegal, they avoid writing it down in any medium at all. They won't develop an in-house app for messaging because they're not going to be messaging these things if it can be avoided. Instead, they send a meeting invite and then discuss it in an ephemeral medium like voice or in person. > I also assume this is how most illegal collusion is done as well, Smart people colluding for illegal activities aren't going to take notes or leave anything in writing. It's done in person or in voice, not via e-mail or in-house apps.
CodeWriter23 2y ago
You may be unfamiliar with this concept, but a conversation over lunch or drinks would be another data point.

banish-m4 2y ago

In-house tools are jobs programs for megacorps. "Why use COTS when you can grow a pyramid with something made internally?" More work = job security. Meta has Workplace, for example.

fao_ 2y ago

> my assumption is that tech companies with a lot of talent develop their own messaging apps for the execs and friends. err- i dont mean to be rude but, what gave you that assumption?

schmidtleonard 2y ago

It's not an app, it's the golf club. This is what golf clubs are for.

Aurornis 2y ago

> I could be wrong, but my assumption is that tech companies with a lot of talent develop their own messaging apps for the execs and friends. This is an incorrect assumption. E-mail and even SMS text messaging are heavily relied upon. This very story shows that Amazon execs were using Signal, not some custom application. If a company was found to have developed a custom in-house app that was exclusively used by executives and their friends, it would immediately become the central target of their investigation. > Why would they risk using a popular platform? I think the part you've missed is that if someone is discussing something sensitive or illegal, they avoid writing it down in any medium at all. They won't develop an in-house app for messaging because they're not going to be messaging these things if it can be avoided. Instead, they send a meeting invite and then discuss it in an ephemeral medium like voice or in person. > I also assume this is how most illegal collusion is done as well, Smart people colluding for illegal activities aren't going to take notes or leave anything in writing. It's done in person or in voice, not via e-mail or in-house apps.

CodeWriter23 2y ago

You may be unfamiliar with this concept, but a conversation over lunch or drinks would be another data point.