Notices by Rich Felker (dalias@hachyderm.io), page 2

@Anachron @simendsjo @jameshowell I'm not going to do your homework for you or further engage with you because you are not engaging in good faith.

It was well documented to the satisfaction of your own instance's admin team and in plenty of other places you can find.

@simendsjo @jameshowell @Gina Like seriously, randomly showing up in folks' mentions to basically say "no, this abusive thing that happened to LGBTQ folks actually didn't happen" is denialism and is a violation of any reasonable instance's rules against anti-LGBTQ hate speech.

@praveen @ska @data0 @roy_calum @prav It's not about "boycott" but safety. You do not use software written by people who want your friends dead because eventually they'll do something to it that you don't notice that harms you and your friends.

@simendsjo @jameshowell BTW @Gina come deal with your nazi. FFS I thought you were fixing this. Someone who denies the abuses of your previous nazi mod and claims there was no issue needs the banhammer. Not just removal as mod but removal from instance.

@simendsjo @jameshowell Don't thank Anachron. He is the new nazi mod and he's outright lying.

The original nazi mod issue was that they had someone on their mod team who was found to have been been bragging about using their admin powers on Reddit (they were also a mod there) to target and abuse LGBTQ folks.

Anachron denies that this happened despite there being irrefutable evidence. Because he doesn't think they did anything wrong. And for that view he was rewarded by being given mod powers.

@antonia @Gaelan @eta Something that we all know is non private and that folks who care about privacy don't use. But yes they should remove it.

@mcSlibinas @psperling @ulfi @dangillmor You clearly haven't thought about any of this and don't know what you're talking about, and are just being obnoxiously contrarian in line with the original mansplaining douche we were dunking on.

@eta @signalapp I have never encountered this prompt on Android Signal.

@Gaelan @antonia @eta SGX is not load bearing for the actual privacy guarantees about message contents. It's supplementary for other things for which you can't make hard guarantees with their model.

@mcSlibinas @ulfi @dangillmor No. There is no such thing as it "getting smart". The entire idea is the opposite of smart. Especially in the context of privacy and messaging. You absolutely do not want anyone or anything "smart" reading your confidential messages and acting on their contents. That's contrary to the entire purpose.

@mcSlibinas @ulfi @dangillmor How dense are you guys?? She specifically said no, and we all know the only "usefulness" of these "tools" is deception and exploitation. No. There will not be "AI" in Signal.

@simendsjo @jameshowell New leadership is doing a really poor job. Some nazi asshat posted his manifesto on all sorts of random topics including the past Fosstodon mod situation, misrepresenting it, then replied to himself asking to be a mod on Fosstodon. They made him one.

@alwayscurious @mjg59 I claim it's far weaker than a cpu backdoor because you can't target it. It doesn't have enough information to know when it wants to break things, and it doesn't have any channel to exfiltrate anything; it would have to break things in a way that causes the cpu malfunction to double as exfiltration.

Advantage of having it on a separate processor is that you get hard realtime without having a hard-realtime rootkit below ring 0 on the real cpu where it *would* have access to all the context to to attacks.

@mcc @ireneista Thanks for clarifying! I wasn't clear from what perspective you meant "users".

@alwayscurious @mjg59 What attacks do you have in mind if it has no communication channels, and how would baked-in intentional breakage here be any different from baked-in intentional breakage in the cpu that you also can't see?

@unlambda @mcc That's a broken approach. The problem is not "kinds of clients" but honoring consent of post authors in what you do with their works.

You don't need a ToS to tell folks that it's copyright infringement and privacy rights violation against your users to aggregate, prepare derivative works, or republish things users have posted in any way other than how they've specified they want it used thru the protocol.

@alwayscurious @mjg59 That's good, it means it should operate independently with no control channels between the power management processor and the domain that contains any user data or code except a simple channel for setting power management parameters.

Right? [insert Padme meme]

@mcc @ireneista I'm trying to figure out what you mean by that.

@alwayscurious @ireneista @mjg59 Sounds good to me.

@alwayscurious @mjg59 Theoretically that would be lovely. But a sufficiently expressive form would essentially become a programming language/virtual machine (like ACPI) that doesn't actually express how to use the hardware to a human except "execute this code on the virtual machine and the the thing comes out, or have fun reverse engineering it if you actually want to know what's happening".