What is the charge? For operating a messaging platform? A succulent private messaging platform?
Allowing criminal activity to go unmoderated on the platform. Including but not limited to fraud, drug trafficking, cyberbullying, organized crime and promotion of terrorism.
true but if its truly end to end encrypted it cant be moderated.
between this and mega its clear they want your files easy to reach and access, privacy and security be damned.
the internet should be free for the same reason we have the 2nd amendment - its necessary for exposing and opposing tyranny.
so kill telegram and watch criminal orgs and militant groups just spin up their own servers or use encrypted radio or just encrypt messages themselves to send through any other platform.
its the cops and feds job to investigate these people, they didnt need a fucking all seeing AI to do it in the prior century and they dont now.
i mean seriously what happened to sting operations? its so damn easy to catch predators n shit on discord, and these telegrams are easy enough to join. do actual detective work smfh .
if its truly end to end encrypted
Telegram chats aren’t end-to-end encrypted by default, and group messages cannot be encrypted. Just saying.
promotion of terrorism.
You know the accusations are bogus when you see this.
Just because it is most of the time bullshit, it doesn’t mean that is not a thing ever. The “think of the children” doesn’t imply that legit application of child-protection laws are not a thing.
Telegram is for example known for Russian military bloggers, which are, in fact, promoting terrorism.
Even a broken clock is right twice a day. Even as a general user I’ve come across illegal shit on Telegram, so they clearly aren’t even attempting to moderate. It would be absolutely zero surprise that obvious terrorist organizations like ISIL would be using the platform for some communication and recruiting. And that doesn’t even get into subjective shit like Russian aggression and attacks on civilians in Ukraine, which many would consider terrorist attacks.
The reference on wikipedia, for my fellow people out of the loop
As someone who did not. What is it referencing here?
Edit: Thanks for the replies. The video was funny, lol.
See @TWeaK@lemm.ee Woosh link in the comments below
See, this is a tough one. Privacy concerns are legitimate, but also, when people keep reminding that Meta was a key player in acts of terror and genocide what is often not said is that a lot of it happened over Whatsapp groups and direct messages, as in India and Burkina Faso. Direct messaging apps are also social media.
I don’t have a solution for this. It’s a mess of an issue and honestly, I don’t know that I trust anybody with a strong, aggressive position one way or the other.
Direct messaging apps are also social media.
How do you define social media in a way that includes DMs but doesn’t include basically all communication?
One thing that has always felt different about Telegram in particular was the large, public groups. I’ve never used WhatsApp but you can’t really get the same virality on something like Signal or plain SMS/RCS/etc. If you can widely share “rich” media, it kinda fits the bill for social media imo.
I think 30+ people died directly in India due to fake message rumors on WhatsApp last year. The rumours were basically of child kidnapping rings doing the rounds and if someone new wandered in into a secluded community, they would be suspected and in rare cases, killed. Since India saw an exceptional implosion in smartphone usage in recent years and WhatsApp is the most popular messaging platform there, it’s a travesty that it happened.
Stringent supporters of privacy will tell you it has no ill effects, and any policies obstructing it aren’t preventing illegal activity, including child pornography. Maybe they feel like they just have to say this, as it’s the most-effective thing to say, but it seems fairly obviously to be untrue, and I would argue counter-productive. I’m confident whatever government (French or otherwise) cares more about knowing and controlling everything than they do about preventing crime, but to say it couldn’t or wouldn’t prevent crime I can only interpret as a bad faith argument. So bad faith on both sides, as per usual.
Personally, I just think the good outweighs the bad. We just can’t expect literally everyone to forfeit any sense of privacy because some criminals are going to use it to commit crimes. That’s a super dangerous precedent. You’re just going to have to find other ways to track them down, or accept that crime as a casualty of privacy and freedom.
But by default the comms aren’t end-to-end encrypted. Isn’t desiderable that criminals use telegram rather than signal?
Not being end-to-end encrypted is meaningless to law enforcement if Telegram refuses to turn over the chat contents (which they do). Law enforcement can’t just eavesdrop on the conversation without Telegram’s cooperation. The chat contents are still secured by TLS from the user’s device to the Telegram servers.
Smart professional criminals rarely use Telegram for this stuff anyway. There’s WhatsApp and plenty of other popular platforms of end-to-end encrypted
if Telegram refuses to turn over the chat contents (which they do)
Source?
Law enforcement can’t just eavesdrop on the conversation without Telegram’s cooperation
Why do you think Roskomnadzor gave up their blockage plans in 2018? And then made their own official government channels? “It’s technically difficult for us” has never stopped Roskomnadzor before.
The source is this article.
It’s not just “technically difficult” to eavesdrop. Properly implemented, it’s computationally impossible to eavesdrop on a connection secured with TLS.
The fact that Signal has not run into legal trouble when Telegram has.
Also Signal has some really shady practices, such as rejecting and killing all third party clients.
Seriously? Arresting messaging app CEO for content of people’s chats? I guess pigs are pissed, that they can’t crack the encryption.
Encryption on Telegram only works in 1 on 1 chats and is turned off by default so no one use it.
-
When talking abou encryption for chat apps, it’s uaually about E2E…
-
We are usually talking about open groups on Telegram. I can join them. You can join them. Police can join them. Everyone can read everything afterwards.
Your connection to the Lemmy server you are using is also encrypted. But I can read your response anyway… So, no E2E…
You should really brush up on how the internet and computers work, this is a scarily bad way to think about your Internet traffic
You don’t need to crack down encryption for most of the platform. There are people in open groups who sometimes post illegal stuff.
If someone posts that they want to see person XY dead, it should not make a difference whether it’s on Reddit, Lemmy or in an open Telegram group…
The least we can expect is some kind of moderation like on Reddit or here.
On one hand, that’s awful and Telegram should continue to exist totally unmoderated.
Oh the other, anybody rich enough to arrive in a private jet belongs in jail for being a total psychopath.
