Sources for what, exactly? What is “fantasming”? The title of the article you posted is “Criminalization of encryption”. The Guardian is using encryption to send messages, so why would they be exempt? In fact, why would any internet use at all not be criminalized? It’s all encrypted.
I don’t know everything. Just because it’s not explicitly listed today doesn’t mean it won’t be tomorrow. This was just created yesterday. And it does the same thing that all of those listed apps do: facilitates private communication.
Ulrich@feddit.org 1 month ago
Sources for what, exactly? What is “fantasming”? The title of the article you posted is “Criminalization of encryption”. The Guardian is using encryption to send messages, so why would they be exempt? In fact, why would any internet use at all not be criminalized? It’s all encrypted.
Diurnambule@jlai.lu 1 month ago
So you read the title and you know everything. That the end for me. Have a great day.
Ulrich@feddit.org 1 month ago
I don’t know everything. Just because it’s not explicitly listed today doesn’t mean it won’t be tomorrow. This was just created yesterday. And it does the same thing that all of those listed apps do: facilitates private communication.
Diurnambule@jlai.lu 1 month 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.