You must log in or register to comment.

alice_damespiel t1_j9thz7z wrote

Classic "won't anyone think of the children?!".

Interestingly, a guy from Element said they would be affected as well, but I wonder how that would work given the scattered nature of Matrix.


JebanuusPisusII t1_j9tuswi wrote

Isn't their company and foundation registered in the UK? They would have to re-register elsewhere but it wouldn't affect anyone's ability to host their own server there and communicate safely.


autotldr t1_j9swm6k wrote

This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 84%. (I'm a bot)

> The encrypted-messaging app Signal has said it would stop providing services in the UK if a new law undermined encryption.

> It added "The Online Safety Bill does not represent a ban on end-to-end encryption but makes clear that technological changes should not be implemented in a way that diminishes public safety - especially the safety of children online."It is not a choice between privacy or child safety - we can and we must have both.

> Asked if the Online Safety Bill could jeopardise their ability to offer a service in the UK, she told the BBC: "It could, and we would absolutely 100% walk rather than ever undermine the trust that people place in us to provide a truly private means of communication.

Extended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: encryption^#1 Safety^#2 child^#3 government^#4 Bill^#5


Vardy t1_j9twokx wrote

We all know how this story goes. If this was to ever pass into law on the basis of targetting a specific group of people, it'll end up targetting everyone either by default or the scope will always increase. All it does is expand the capability of mass surveillance on the general populace. Thats the real end goal.

The people who they say the law is targetting will always be able to overcome this law with a simple search on Github for some open source projects.


[deleted] t1_j9w4kop wrote

People still use signal after they dropped sms compatibility?

Easy there Jason Bourne