Should Telegram be blocked?

[Avocado Diaboli]

1 hour ago, Distinctly Average said:

You are the one that is not getting it. If it is proven, by in this case someone from law enforcement joining one of these groups as well as under cover reporters, that the group owners are dodgy gits who need their man globes chewed off by rabid goats then privacy has sod all to do with it. The platform know about said dodgy twats but protect them. Just because something is encrypted to the nth degree doesn’t mean there are still no methods to uncover what said dodgy twats are doing. The point is that the platform, despite knowing what is going on, are doing sod all to help prevent it. They do not need to break privacy to do that.

 

Next time someone tortures one of you or your families pets, or abuses a family member, then you can talk about the perpetrators right to privacy. The right to privacy does not extend to certain crimes. 
 

This kind of privacy is a relatively new thing. 15-20 years ago it did not exist. We had, and still do have the right to a private life. But this right cannot be at all costs.

You clearly have no clue what encryption and other privacy focused measures are, how they work and what their reasons for existing are. Please educate yourself before you make yourself look like a fool like this. Also, don't pretend that because I explained to you how privacy focused communication works that I somehow condone this behavior, no need to project your ire at me. I'm here to teach you something. Clearly you're not listening, so I'm wasting my time. 

[Distinctly Average]

1 minute ago, Avocado Diaboli said:

You clearly have no clue what encryption and other privacy focused measures are, how they work and what their reasons for existing are. Please educate yourself before you make yourself look like a fool like this. Also, don't pretend that because I explained to you how privacy focused communication works that I somehow condone this behavior, no need to project your ire at me. I'm here to teach you something. Clearly you're not listening, so I'm wasting my time. 

You assume I have no idea how they work, but you are wrong. It has been what pays my mortgage for 20+ years. The whole concept of privacy is false or miss-understood. Encryption has its place, but it is abused and that is where I feel things need to change. Here it is not the concept of encryption that I have a problem with, it is large companies hiding behind it. They know there is an issue, know the individuals involved and without breaking encryption have had those individuals revealed to them. As I said above, you don’t need to break that encryption to reveal what an individual is up to. These criminals need to gain something from their actions, whether it is financial, comradeship in their abuse or confirmation. This means they share with others what they are up to and gain the attention of the authorities. That part is good, but for a company to hide behind privacy in the way telegram regularly do is wrong. 

[kumicota]

2 hours ago, Distinctly Average said:

You assume I have no idea how they work, but you are wrong.

 

2 hours ago, Distinctly Average said:

As I said above, you don’t need to break that encryption to reveal what an individual is up to.

What? This makes me think you don't know how it works. Because that's not how encryption works.

 

Journalist and tech illiterate people doesn't understand that they can't read encrypted data without breaking encryption.

 

The way that telegram and every E2EE app(like WhatsApp) report works is that, when you report it. They send group, contact and other info about the user decrypted and someone reviews it and do the needed actions. You can't read without doing this

[Distinctly Average]

2 minutes ago, kumicota said:

 

What? This makes me think you don't know how it works. Because that's not how encryption works.

 

Journalist and tech illiterate people doesn't understand that they can't read encrypted data without breaking encryption.

 

The way that telegram and every E2EE app(like WhatsApp) report works is that, when you report it. They send group, contact and other info about the user decrypted and someone reviews it and do the needed actions. You can't read without doing this

I fully understand how encryption works. The weak point is humans. How do you think people discovered and join in the acts on telegram that are being discussed? Did someone break the encryption? Obviously not. They found out by contacting people, pretending they were into that sort of thing and then being allowed to join the groups and share in the acts. It is not rocket science. This is how many pen testing companies make their money, by finding the weak spots. It is how law enforcement agencies and journalists have to work in these days of strong encryption. It is how child abuser hunter groups infiltrate these rings. They pretend to be a vulnerable child until they are bought in. Or they pretend to be interested in joining the groups and become part of it. You cannot see that it appears and are only looking at it from the technology viewpoint. The lowest common denominator it the human (or inhumane in these cases) element. People are easy to manipulate into giving up their privacy. As I said above, the criminals want to either make money or share their depravity. Either way, they need others to join and that is the weak point.

[johnno23]

17 hours ago, Distinctly Average said:

Point is, if illegal activity is reported to them then they should not run and hide behind privacy

What is illegal activity ? the wife cheating on the husband or husband cheating on the wife ? religious law would say illegal but the perpetrator say love regular law says domestic issue not illegal. two sides to every coin but amazing how many people skirt the edge.

My only point is that at what point does one need to have a third party to decide what is right wrong or illegal?

You cannot ban human behavior and individuals decide for themselves if they wish to participate in legal or illegal activity. 

Any communication platform can be used for good or twisted to suit another persons ideas and opinions. 

Anyways privacy is something that may have helped humanity so many times and we never truly hear about it.? 

How many scientists from opposing governments have thanks to privacy been able to communicate and work towards solutions to issues ?? I have no idea and possibly never but privacy does allow such a scenario to exist. Media will only illustrate the dark side to a situation as that can generate interest and interest can generate income.

Man goes crazy kills 2 people........1 million views. Man makes 200 people happy 25 views and there is the problem For ad revenue the Crazy man on a killing spree is good for business the man making others happy is of less impact. Simply human behavior and we are guilty of participation by allowing ourselves to be drawn towards the bad more often than seeing the good.

[Distinctly Average]

59 minutes ago, johnno23 said:

What is illegal activity ? the wife cheating on the husband or husband cheating on the wife ? religious law would say illegal but the perpetrator say love regular law says domestic issue not illegal. two sides to every coin but amazing how many people skirt the edge.

My only point is that at what point does one need to have a third party to decide what is right wrong or illegal?

You cannot ban human behavior and individuals decide for themselves if they wish to participate in legal or illegal activity. 

Any communication platform can be used for good or twisted to suit another persons ideas and opinions. 

Anyways privacy is something that may have helped humanity so many times and we never truly hear about it.? 

How many scientists from opposing governments have thanks to privacy been able to communicate and work towards solutions to issues ?? I have no idea and possibly never but privacy does allow such a scenario to exist. Media will only illustrate the dark side to a situation as that can generate interest and interest can generate income.

Man goes crazy kills 2 people........1 million views. Man makes 200 people happy 25 views and there is the problem For ad revenue the Crazy man on a killing spree is good for business the man making others happy is of less impact. Simply human behavior and we are guilty of participation by allowing ourselves to be drawn towards the bad more often than seeing the good.

Illegal activity has to be defined quite easily in these cases. The country where the crime is committed, the country where it is viewed or interacted with and the country spreading it. So take a recent case of sharing child porn involving children as young as three. The group shared their videos via Telegram with the actual abuse occurring in numerous countries. The members were from various countries including the US, Canada, UK, France etc. So all the countries where abusing a three year old is illegal need to be responsible for enforcement and if that means blocking those feeds so be it. Youtube do lots to stop this kind of communication, so do Facebook but seem less efficient at it. Telegram hides behind so called privacy and should be taken to task. Many countries block this kind of communication when it is discovered.

[johnno23]

I cannot disagree with the issue you describe but it is still not a reason to ban or remove a communication tool from the public due to the choices of what is a very small number compared to the number of users that use the tool for legitimate reasons. 

What does amaze me is the lack of transparency of the bodies set up to protect such innocents from such exploitation.

after all even if you have a secure phone even a burner phone if you call an emergency number the phone and its location can be tracked by the emergency services if they take the time or make the effort. those tools exist. In many cases where child porn is discovered the amount of high level so called responsible people involved is staggering.....look no further than cases as the child killer/porn issue that occurred in Europe with Dutroux. Belgium got the most flak but his work was spread among hi level people across Europe. All too often the so called gate keepers of justice and normality are often guilty and once again a small percentage when compared to the majority.

A gun might be used for defense but defense is not an argument to go kill people with a gun. 

I find it amazing that when people speak of governments and their ability to track trace and find people with spying listening in etc that the most horrific of crimes can go unfound unsolved etc. Do journalist have access to tools more powerful then governments ? and yet it is often the result of individuals not government agencies that expose these scandals....go figure ?

[Distinctly Average]

36 minutes ago, johnno23 said:

I cannot disagree with the issue you describe but it is still not a reason to ban or remove a communication tool from the public due to the choices of what is a very small number compared to the number of users that use the tool for legitimate reasons. 

What does amaze me is the lack of transparency of the bodies set up to protect such innocents from such exploitation.

after all even if you have a secure phone even a burner phone if you call an emergency number the phone and its location can be tracked by the emergency services if they take the time or make the effort. those tools exist. In many cases where child porn is discovered the amount of high level so called responsible people involved is staggering.....look no further than cases as the child killer/porn issue that occurred in Europe with Dutroux. Belgium got the most flak but his work was spread among hi level people across Europe. All too often the so called gate keepers of justice and normality are often guilty and once again a small percentage when compared to the majority.

A gun might be used for defense but defense is not an argument to go kill people with a gun. 

I find it amazing that when people speak of governments and their ability to track trace and find people with spying listening in etc that the most horrific of crimes can go unfound unsolved etc. Do journalist have access to tools more powerful then governments ? and yet it is often the result of individuals not government agencies that expose these scandals....go figure ?

Yep, all frightening stuff. I actually think the days of true privacy are long gone. We are tracked in so many ways. Privacy, or the concept of it, is so easy to abuse. Take the recent case where a car was stolen with a baby in it. The manufacturer, VW, were able to track the car but refused to give the information to law enforcement without a court order. Fortunately the car was found and the child was OK. It could quite easily have gone the other way due to the obstinance of VW in their quest for privacy. Yet they are tracking all the cars themselves so know where we all are, seems duplicitous.  

 

As I said, ban was my knee jerk reaction to quite a sick story. It was the response from Telegram that angered me. I am surprised links in youtube comments to telegram are not something a channel owner can easily ban. Instead it is a very manual action to remove comment spam like that. 

[johnno23]

to a large extent most users of any platform for communication and apps use them for reasons that suit their needs.

when it comes to posts out in the open the best form of control is where others can flag a post as fake scam etc. quite often even the most basic apps have tools where when such things are highlighted and then an actual human can moderate and check.

When things get hidden that is where it gets complicated and wish the tools that they do have were used to actually do positive work to entrap and prosecute such people involved in such crimes. 

3 hours ago, Distinctly Average said:

As I said, ban was my knee jerk reaction to quite a sick story. It was the response from Telegram that angered me.

Nothing wrong in a kneejerk reaction....what is important is that you were open to discussion and that is always a positive. sadly many people will have a reaction but then shutdown any alternative opinions and that is where we end up with so many really radical ideas and opinions that prevent any sensible dialogue.

[SkipRat]

No

[Distinctly Average]

29 minutes ago, SkipRat said:

No

Sounds like you read the title and not the thread.