If the data exists within US jurisdiction, the US government feels (and, in practice, is) entitled to it. Plan accordingly.

This is true in virtually every country with a system of warrants for evidence collection when investigating a crime. The problem here for many people is the underlying police violence that in part instigated these crimes against the police.

Unfortunately, this order will prevent the police from using any video evidence of crimes perpetrated by a police officer found in the evidence siezed.

It wouldn't happen either way as that requires somebody to prosecute the police.

The actual report that the Bloomberg article keeps referring to but never links:

https://www.bea.gov/news/2020/gross-domestic-product-1st-qua...

Yes, but you need to be prepared to take it to court when someone uses your software in war.

and when the answer is “hey, it’s GPL’d, here’s our source download link, fuck off we’re exactly following the rules”?

Licenses are not a viable solution to this sort of ethical quandry.

That answer should be unsatisfactory to the court, since it wasn't licensed under the GPL. The rules, in this case, say no use in war.

FOIA has no real penalties for noncompliance. In Washington State, our public records law has penalties (legal fees + $100 per day of noncompliance), and as a result, state agencies tend to actually follow it.

> Use it in a manner that SpaceX disagrees with and you can expect lawyers.

This is probably true, but it's hard to be certain that they'd prevail. Has this actually been tested in court?

We now have explicit, written authorization from the head of WhatsApp to reverse engineer ("tear through") the binaries. The ToS only prohibits unauthorized reverse engineering. I agree with you that it was disallowed prior to this comment, but I think it's OK now.

Please implement a warrant canary while you still can, before you are legally compelled not to.

> especially career twitter archaeologists who dig up old tweets and put them out of context

Richard Stallman doesn't tweet. What are you talking about?

Previous discussion https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20861948

Apparently you need to fail verification a few times before it'll present the option. I kept giving it bogus phone numbers and eventually a "skip" button appeared.

I wouldn't trust an app where the first thing you have to do is navigate dark patterns.

It's likely because of those dark patterns that they can use it in the first place given how walled garden app stores treat apps that do allow for actual anonymous or distributed messaging systems.

I wouldn't either, but it would seem that HKers don't have many options at this time. Hope more are identified and that there aren't malicious intentions with this current one.

How is that a dark pattern? It's better if you do verify, so you can see your contacts and others can know it's you. If that fails, then we offer to use the app without verification.