• @Diurnambule@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    English
    114 hours ago

    Yeah but contrary to these listed, the judge know the guardian is a newspaper, they shouldn’t be able to make him/her afraid in the same way they did.

    • Ulrich
      link
      fedilink
      English
      113 hours ago

      Yeah but contrary to these listed, the judge know the guardian is a newspaper

      The logic does not check out. Signal isn’t going to integrate a news section and then suddenly be exempt from this regulation.

      • @Diurnambule@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1
        edit-2
        11 hours ago

        It show you didn’t read, I am explaining the article piece by piece. They used the lost a gave you to convince a judge it was a terrorist behavior. It is not forbidden to crypt things. And they would not have been able to convince a judge the news application guardian is a terrorist tool. And I am bad a English so I am trying to resume a English article to you in broken English. I am sure I use the wrong word and as long as you don’t read you can keep playing me. You are taking more time debating things I have an hard time explain than reading the article. Do you wan me to copy paste in entirely here so you can avoid one click ?

        • Ulrich
          link
          fedilink
          English
          011 hours ago

          I read the entire thing. I don’t need it explained to me. It’s clear just by looking at it that they’re targeting all encrypted communications.

          And they would not have been able to convince a judge the news application guardian is a terrorist tool.

          I think it’s pretty obvious that they could.