cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/1874605

A 17-year-old from Nebraska and her mother are facing criminal charges including performing an illegal abortion and concealing a dead body after police obtained the pair’s private chat history from Facebook, court documents published by Motherboard show.

  • LeZero@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    98
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    To the people shitting on the idea of a default defederation with Meta, how about we deferedate not because it will affect us as posters but because they are evil pieces of shit?

    • b3nsn0w@pricefield.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      48
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      yeah, the difference is pretty stark:

      • lemmy: we’ll give you a way to dm anyone on site, but please don’t use that, if you set up an app on this other open source service we’re not affiliated with (which is basically an encrypted discord) we’ll do our best to make it as seamless for you as possible. we’ll keep warning you for your own privacy.
      • meta/facebook: aggressively keeps you on-platform for spying purposes; literally killed xmpp a decade ago and they’ll fuckin do it again (if we let them)

      They trust me. Dumb fucks.

      - Mark Zuckerberg

      (yes it sounds like satire but that’s a real quote)

      • nLuLukna @sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        1 year ago

        The Lemmy DM is imo actually quite important. If I want to get in touch with someone about a post, nothing more. It is an easy option, and serves a purpose. It isn’t imo meant to be used for anything else.

        • b3nsn0w@pricefield.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          1 year ago

          yep, it’s important that we have this capability, but it’s also nice that unlike other platforms that do their best to lock you in, lemmy actively pushes you toward a safer alternative

            • b3nsn0w@pricefield.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              17
              ·
              1 year ago

              Matrix, which is pretty much an encrypted and open-source Discord clone (at least in the same fashion as Lemmy would be a Reddit clone). I personally use Element to interact with it and have a matrix.org account, but Matrix is just like the fediverse, you can choose any instance or client you want, or even host an instance yourself. In your Lemmy settings you can set up your Matrix user, right below your email address as of 0.18.1, and if you do, a new buttons saying “send secure message” will show up on your profile, next to “send message”, which will redirect people trying to message you to Matrix.

      • bluejay@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        Was it Facebook that killed xmpp or Google? Legitimately asking because I’ve always seen that blamed on Google.

        • triarius@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          It was Google, they Embraced, Extended, and Extinguished it with Google Chat. Then they killed that themselves.

          • triplenadir@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            correction: it was both! fedbook chat also supported xmpp at first, they never federated but you could at least use it with a jabber client. then when they had enough market share they killed it.

            fun semi related fact is that whatsapp, at least a couple of years ago, was using modified ejabberd (ie an xmpp server) as the backend - so arguably they helped with EEE too.

        • b3nsn0w@pricefield.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          google does seem to be the main culprit, but facebook still played a role as far as i’m aware. these two companies also colluded a lot so i wouldn’t trust either of them with anything federated

      • favrion@yiffit.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That was a quote from 13 years ago when he didn’t know how massive his enterprise would become. People change.

        As for him, he became more evil.

      • Steeve@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        How on earth did Meta kill XMPP, where is that even from lol. They didn’t even have a standalone messaging app until 2011, which is after Google Talk dropped support for XMPP.

        • bogdugg@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          Some game-of-telephone misinformation originating from this article - though it has gone from Google killed it (which this article states), to it was a protocol that allowed Facebook and Google to communicate and then got killed, to Facebook killed it.

          • Steeve@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I don’t even agree that Google killed it, because it’s simply a messaging protocol, it doesn’t “die”. Maybe you could try to argue that Google killed Jabber, but I used Jabber back in the early 00s, pretty much nobody else did lol, almost all IM communication was done over MSN Messenger. Google Talk brought XMPP “users” and they left when Google sunsetted Talk in favour of Hangouts. Facebook Messenger used XMPP for a time, so if anything they “revived” it (they didn’t, it was never dead), but, like all the other messaging apps, they moved to their own proprietary version to add their own features.

            This is what XMPP was actually designed for, the X literally means “eXtensible”, whether it’s extended open source or into proprietary versions.

            I feel like there’s a lot of anti-tech misinformation on Lemmy and it’s great to be skeptical, but honestly I think we waste a ton of time being easily ragebait’d into the wrong shit.

          • b3nsn0w@pricefield.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            my understanding was that while google is the main culprit, facebook and google both played a big part in killing it. but since we’re discussing meta/facebook here, and they’re not blameless, i focused on that.

            but yeah, fuck google too.

            • Steeve@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              they’re not blameless

              I think we should try to do better here and provide actual reasoning to our statements instead of unbridled rage, regardless of the topic, because this isn’t valuable content. I work in an adjacent industry and I believe that a lot of what people have said lately about this topic is overly sensationalized and I don’t mind discussing it, but “fuck Meta/Google because they’re evil” is subjective as hell and gets us nowhere except back to Reddit culture.

              This discussion pyramid was a good post from the other day:

              https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/b48a0a91-c7a3-4cc5-a117-6deceedde205.png

              Your comments are “ad hominem” at best.

              • b3nsn0w@pricefield.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                1 year ago

                Saying distrust is an ad hominem is one of the takes ever, lol. And that’s what all of this boils down to, trust. Do we trust Meta with not exploiting all of our data, and turning it against us at the earliest opportunity? Do we trust Meta that they want to contribute to the fediverse, and not just hurt it because it’s a competitor?

                By the same logic, blocking or banning a person instead of vetting every post and comment of theirs would also be an ad hominem. But at the end of the day, it’s just practical. Meta has a long and not so proud history of being extremely anti-consumer, and shoving that track record under the rug, trying to absolve them of responsibility and consequences for their actions, under the thought-terminating cliche of an ad hominem is neither productive nor practical.

                Yes, people are mad at Meta, and yes, the distrust means their actions are scrutinized more than they otherwise would be, but that doesn’t mean that their actions aren’t actually massively anti-consumer, and that they aren’t a massive liability. In this particular case, you can make the argument that they had a legal obligation to hand over the data, had they not tried to build a walled garden with no privacy they wouldn’t have had the data to hand over to begin with.

                (also, unrelated: you can embed images using the ![](https://image_url) syntax, and you can even add alt text in the brackets to help users with screen readers)

                • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  I think the simpler answer is more likely to be correct. The Fediverse isn’t big enough to really bother Meta, but ActivityPub is a convenient way to seem cool, so they’ll partially support it as long as it doesn’t cost them all that much. Once the marketing gimmick has run it’s course, they’ll drop it.

                  I think the same was true for XMPP. I don’t think they planned to kill XMPP and I don’t think they plan to kill ActivityPub. But they did kill XMPP, and they’ll probably kill ActivityPub by accident as well when they support it just well enough to pull people over.

                  So I’m not worried about some Meta conspiracy to kill ActivityPub, I’m worried about getting steamrolled on accident for a similar reason that people don’t want to share locations of where they took pictures: they don’t want the big mass of people coming to destroy something unique.

                  So my recommendation is to push for making everything E2E encrypted by default, and have every message cryptographically signed by the contributor. If there’s something ad companies hate it’s privacy, and that’s what we should be pursuing. I’m not sure how that works for Lemmy, but surely there’s a way for instances to manage who can decrypt messages.

                • Steeve@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Saying distrust is an ad hominem is one of the takes ever, lol.

                  It is literally ad hominem, that is the definition. We aren’t discussing whether we can trust Meta or not, we’re discussing a specific topic.

                  By the same logic, blocking or banning a person instead of vetting every post and comment of theirs would also be an ad hominem.

                  It definitely is, but again, we aren’t discussing a person or an entity, we’re discussing a topic related to that person or entity. This isn’t a discussion on whether Meta should be defederated or not, frankly that’s simple, just join an instance that defederates with Meta or don’t, or build your own! There’s a ton of freedom here.

                  And I’m not saying ad hominem arguments can’t be used, but when an argument is entirely made up of ad hominem points while discussing a specific topic it isn’t a good argument.

                  Also, side note, as for trust I definitely don’t think we can trust corporate entities, but I also don’t think we can entirely trust the Fediverse as it exists already. We know there’s been an influx of bot accounts, moderation tools aren’t great yet, and every platform attracts bad actors.

                  (also, unrelated: you can embed images using the ![](https://image_url) syntax, and you can even add alt text in the brackets to help users with screen readers)

                  Thanks for the tip! Haven’t been able to get that working well here, I think I was missing the exclamation mark.

              • Alien Nathan Edward@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                in a thread where we’re discussing how meta helped religiofascists violate someone’s human rights “meta is evil” is a summary, not an ad hominem

                • Steeve@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  That’s literally nowhere in this chain of comments.

                • Steeve@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Fine, their comments are nonsense that aren’t based in reality and the Fediverse and it’s communities will suffer the fate of every other echo chamber shithole social media if it’s moderators don’t take action and make a conscious decision to tackle misinformation, regardless of whether or not it fits their personal bias. Better?

              • graphite@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                but “fuck Meta/Google because they’re evil” is subjective as hell and gets us nowhere except back to Reddit culture.

                That’s true. A lot of Reddit culture is cringe as well

        • siouxsy@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah Google is more to blame for that. When they defedarated it was pretty much the end of XMPP. From what I remember, Facebook used the protocol but never opened their service for federation.

    • DrQuint@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I vote to write this reasoning at the very top, on the sticked topics when it happens. Like, literally just write “Because Facebook is evil” and don’t elaborate.

      Plus, if someone shows up being a concern troll on the point, they will laser focus on it, taking the bait, we can all just block the person, a world improved.

    • LemmyLefty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      And even if what I do is relatively tame, I want others to be protected from the wolf at the door.

    • BossDj@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      But also fuck these laws and the people passing them and the people voting for the people passing them. They’re the real evil.

      We have to always assume rich corporations are going to do whatever serves their best interest. It’s nature. Like a mantis is gonna bite off her mate’s head when they’re done mating. It’s up to governing factors to keep them in check. On that note, +1 to defederate. They will cannibalize or however abuse Lemmy if it will make them a penny.

    • Telodzrum@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Any Lemmy instance would have given over the same information in this case. Meta was complying with a valid, legal search warrant.

      • PorkrollPosadist@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        If some fuckstick from Nebraska asked me to snitch on my users for something which isn’t a crime in my state, I would simply tell them to fuck themselves, go ahead, and try to have me extradited. If my instance were bordering on a trillion dollars market cap, I’d hire a fucking lawyer.

      • 2MnyDcksOnThDncFlr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I totally agree with your sentiment… However they don’t have a choice. They are legally obligated to turn that information over if they are served a warrant. Doing anything less is obstruction at the very least and they could be shut down and put into receivership.

        The fault here is with the two individuals trusting a corporation to keep data private and to put the individuals interests ahead of the corporation. Neither is a realistic expectation.

        • triplenadir@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          they could have made their shitty DM system end-to-end encrypt messages by default, instead of burying that feature[0] in chat settings

          or, they could have used their MASSIVE wealth and lobbying power to directly fight the warrant in court (if there even was one, they have a long history of just requiring a form ostensibly signed by any cop to turn over private data)

          or they could have just lied and said they couldn’t find the data

          I don’t disagree that people shouldn’t trust Facebook but saying “they don’t have a choice” is absurd

          [0] https://www.facebook.com/help/messenger-app/786613221989782

        • Baylahoo@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          You’re exactly right. They are legally required to turn it over when compelled. Let’s keep that mess away from the federation. It will only get worse.

    • burak@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I think we’re realizing more and more any corporate-operated platform is luring us in to sell to us and sell us.

    • WindyRebel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Are you saying that the individuals who run these servers and instances aren’t subject to the same laws? I read the article, and Facebook complied with a court order.

      You don’t think anyone running Lemmy would do the same without access to lawyers and capital like Facebook has?

      • LeZero@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Do you have to run your lemmy instance in the US?

        Maybe do it in a less backward place

        • lazynooblet@lazysoci.al
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Every interaction on Lemmy is copied to all other federated instances. There are instances all over the world with a copy of yours and my comment. They can track and use those comments for any purpose. Its both a blessing and a curse of an open federated structure.

          • b3nsn0w@pricefield.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            they can also scrape them. that’s not really the point.

            people can dm on lemmy, and only the two instances that host the people on either end of the dm (which may even be the same instance) store that dm. that instance may actually receive a subpoena. but all of this is heavily discouraged by the lemmy interface itself, instead prompting people to set up a matrix account instead, and matrix chats are end-to-end encrypted.

        • Brownboy13@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          And how can we be sure that all the instances federated with any instance we participate on aren’t run by law enforcement themselves? I’d be surprised if there aren’t running instances by every major investigative agency themselves.

          • 🐱TheCat@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            This is why everyone should take steps to protect their privacy. You don’t have to go 0-100 overnight. Just audit yourself and do a few things now. Keep those habits up. Then audit and add a few more things, repeat.

            I need to do this myself, I’ve been slipping

        • kevincox@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Almost all countries have similar systems for obtaining evidence. These people were criminals, they broke the law and the legal system worked as designed to bring them to “justice”. Meta was just a pawn here with very little influence.

          If this story was about a murder rather than an abortion people would think that Meta did the right thing to bring the murderer to justice. As I see it the problem is that people disagree with the law and are using Meta as a scapegoat. But you don’t fix stupid laws by having corporations go vigilante. I’d rather not have billionaires coming up with their own set of laws, that is a recipe for disaster. I think we need to fix the laws, which will fix the root cause of this issue.

          Also use E2EE for all private information, cryptography can’t be compelled to reveal your private data by a court order.

          • LeZero@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Do you think people who collaborated with dictatorial regimes should be excused? Because they followed the law?

            Why didnt Meta implant E2EE on their private chat service then?

            • platypus_plumba@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Because they use what you say to tagert ads and keep a record of who you are. That’s how they make money.

              Which goes back to… You’re just a product. Stop using large platforms for personal shit. That’s their business model, how is it evil if most people know these companies rely on stealing as much information from you as they legally can AND they still use them.

            • kevincox@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              This is what I can agree with. We could blame Meta for encouraging people to give them data. Messenger does actually have E2EE encryption (apparently) but it is quite hidden and limited in functionality. If they made it the default this wouldn’t have been a position they ended up in, and they could have responded to the warrant with “We have no information matching this request.”

              • Tankton@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                If they truly encrypted all chats, they would lose their value to them since its unreadable to meta as well.

      • GenderNeutralBro@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Lemmy promotes using Matrix, which is a separate service, so instance admins don’t need to be in the business of hosting private conversations.

        Matrix is end-to-end encrypted so even the admins of your Matrix server could not provide your chats to law enforcement.

          • b3nsn0w@pricefield.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            It’s not really possible as long as Lemmy is a website. E2EE works on Matrix because it’s an app, and therefore it can manage your encryption keys in ways a browser cannot do for you. (You can save things in the client, but not in a reliable enough way for something like the master key for every communication you ever had that if you lose you get locked out of all your chat history.) In the case of Lemmy, the signing keys for your federated actions are handled by the server, which is perfectly fine for 99% of what you use Lemmy for (public posts and comments), but it also means that even if they implemented E2EE for chats, the keys to decrypt the convo would be right on the same server.

            That’s why Lemmy actively pushes you to set up a Matrix account, because Matrix makes better tradeoffs for the purposes of messaging, while Lemmy’s tradeoffs are more relevant to a link aggregator style social media.

      • Arbiter@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Complying with the law is less of an issue than keeping that data accessible in the first place.

    • 👁️👄👁️@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because it will bring more people to the fedi while bringing a ton more content, support and development. How are people this blind still?

      Give the choice to the users and don’t decide what you think is best for them.

      • Alkider@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        What good is that bloated userbase if it’s just dead or abandoned accounts? If anything, they are more likely to just ctrl + C > ctrl + V their users as well as their privacy policy on their client, which doesn’t really help anyone. Besides, can facebook really be trusted to play by the rules?

        • 👁️👄👁️@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s just straight up not true. Also I hope you are aware how Hot/Active/Top sort works. Let that decision be left up to the users instead of forcing your misinformation on to them.

          • Alkider@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            yo by any chance do you got some stuff I could look into when it comes to how the fediverse works and how threads works as well? If I am wrong, I want to at least see why and also because Yeah to an extent I am kinda assuming stuff based on the comments I’m reading as well as what I personally think.

            • 👁️👄👁️@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Well active and hot stuff shows new content and stuff that is being upvoted and commented on. They also tend to drop in time to be replaced by new content and so old content isn’t perpetually on the front page. So if it’s only active stuff showing up, dead accounts on threads would never show up or really affect anything, right? They’d just be buried in Meta’s huge database.

  • Mikina@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    85
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I’m almost certain that if something like this happened to any fediverse instance - that a local police enforcement would contact the admin and asked for user’s data, which they are required by law to provide or they would go to jail/get a hefty fine and possibly a criminal record, they would do that too. That’s also why E2E is required, to prevent such problems for instance admins - but then again, there’s really nothing you can do against local law, and if it requires that you have to be able to cooperate, well… Then there’s not much the admin can do, without putting himself in a real risk of prosecution, because he is breaking the law by have E2E.

    That’s also a good reason to be careful when selecting your home instance, and making sure that you choose one in a country that has all right laws in that regard.

    Of course, that’s assuming the police makes contact. I don’t suppose that the admins would be searching through the DMs of people to snitch on them. And if Meta is doing that preemtively and is actively snitching on people - that’s downright evil.

  • SkyNTP@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    66
    ·
    1 year ago

    Just yesterday here on Lemmy, I mentioned the dangers of violating privacy, and some commenters went on about “what dangers?” Implying there were none…

    Is it not enough to gesture broadly?

      • Boldizzle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I never said I was comfortable with it, but you clearly missed the point I was making.

        Worry about what data is being harvested in your own country where a law change can suddenly put you in danger of being arrested before worrying about China having some of your data.

        Is it bad how much data the Chinese govt get from you using apps like Tik Tok or phones made by Huawei? Sure, but the threat is a lot closer to home than you think as this article shows.

      • Novman@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        China spying is a problem for your government, your government spying is your problem.

    • capital@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      What data do instances expose to Meta if they federate that Meta (or literally anyone) can’t obtain right now if they wanted?

  • wtry@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    63
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Remember folks, when subverting a theocratic hellscape, use something encrypted.

    • wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      46
      arrow-down
      39
      ·
      1 year ago

      This isn’t subversion, or any sort of theocratic hellscape.

      Girl could have gotten an abortion 100% legally up through 20 weeks of preganancy. At 24 weeks the fetus becomes viable outside the womb. At 28 weeks she (with the assistance of her mother) took meds to kill the fetus and induce a stillbirth, commenting that she couldn’t wait to be able to wear jeans again.

      She goes through natural labor to pass the stillbirth outside of any medical facility or supervision, burns the remains, and buries them on a farm. When questioned by police, she and her mother admit to using Facebook Messenger to discuss their plans.

      The only thing in any way related to the romanticized fiction of some sort of downtrodden freedom seeker you’re talking about is that using encrypted communications would have prevented their discussions from being available to be subpeona’d. That said, admitting to police you even had those discussions in the first place kind of defeats the damn purpose.

      • Butt Pirate@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        39
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Allowing her to just get an abortion would have avoided this entire situation in the first place.

        • wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think I’m missing something here. She was allowed to just get an abortion, for 20 weeks. This was all before the godawful Roe v Wade repeal.

          • Whirlybird@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            It was also in a state that didn’t change their abortion stance after Roe v Wade was repealed. Nothing was stopping her getting an abortion for the first 20 weeks like you said.

        • Auli@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          22
          arrow-down
          18
          ·
          1 year ago

          Eh 28 weeks seems kind of late for an abortion though.

          • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            17
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s none of your business, though. It’s not your body. Besides, Nebraska is basically a third world country when it comes to maternal health care availability, which makes this applicable:

            In low-income countries, half of newborns born at or below 32 weeks gestational age die due to a lack of medical access

            • wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              1 year ago

              Comparing any first world state to third world countries is a hell of a jump.

              Generalizing statistics about third world countries to argue they apply to a first world state, no matter how shitty, poor, or ass backwards the state is… that’s an even bigger leap.

              That statement is applicable to the context it was observed in, low income countries, not backwards ass first world states. Please don’t pretend otherwise. Surely you can make your point with statistics actually relevant to the context of Nebraska.

              • jerkface@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                9
                ·
                1 year ago

                The USA has infant mortality rates that would make most the neutral world (ie “third-world countries”) consider sending aid.

              • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                When it comes to de facto healthcare availability, especially reproductive healthcare, most red states would compare unfavourably to the majority of African countries.

                That’s what happens when you have a system based on profits over access for everyone, add an insurance industry whose main focus is to make sure that as little medical treatment as possible occurs and THEN add corrupt politicians whose owner donors think that even THAT is too generous towards the poors and also an invisible section of the bible says that forcing women to give birth to unwanted children while decreasing the number of places to do so safely is holiness itself.

          • s0q@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            You are right, but you’re swimming against the tide here. 28 weeks is a fully formed child that moves and would survive of born at this point. I am all for reproductive rights but going up to 28 weeks is just irresponsible.

      • brainrein@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        We don’t even know if she had an abortion. May she had a miscarriage and was just trying to avoid what’s happening now, being accused of having had an abortion.

        Now that sounds a lot like theocratic hellscape…

      • wtry@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’ve taken the liberty of re-reading the article and have some things to point out 1. the girl was 17, a literal child, something you seemed to forget in your comment 2. You mentioned that she wanted to wear jeans again and that that was the motive, but the word ‘jeans’ wasn’t even mentioned, which makes me wonder if you’re tampering with anything in your comment coming from the article. All that considered you have a good point with some things such as in this specific situation such as them confessing to conspiracy was not a good idea, but I will still say use something end to end encrypted when doing something like this.

        • Whirlybird@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          It might not be in this article but there are others that state that one of her messages about doing the abortion was that she couldn’t wait to wear jeans again.

          She should have legally gotten an abortion in the first 20 weeks of the pregnancy. I’m all for abortion and reproductive rights, but not when it’s a viable baby already like it is at 28 weeks. She had 5 months to abort legally and easily and she didn’t. Not only did she then illegally abort it, but she burned the stillborn baby and buried it. That’s not ok.

      • bettse@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        commenting that she couldn’t wait to be able to wear jeans again.

        Where was that in the article? I missed it.

      • DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        19
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is really interesting (and awful) context.

        This isn’t a simple “my body my choice” type situation.

      • iviattendurefort@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s kind of stupid to think that one side would use it and the other wouldn’t. Just because they aren’t destroying your privacy for this purpose doesn’t mean left leaning politicians wouldn’t use your data for their own clandestine reasons.

        • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          The right destroys privacy for either their control of the poors or for religious morality police.

          The left destroys privacy to root out fascism.

          They are not the same[.gif].

  • Fickle_Ferret@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    53
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Meta needs to be destroyed. No organisation, person, or people should hold that much power.

    • ATiredPhilosopher@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      As much as I dislike corporations, the conservative parties and judges deserve as much, if not more, blame for this.

    • Kissaki@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      which prompted the state to issue Meta with a search warrant for their chat history and data including log-in timestamps and photos. Meta complied with the request

      They followed the law. Which they have to do.

      This is an issue primarily with the law. It’s not like Meta proactively shared that data.

      There’s huge issues with Meta. But they’re mostly beside the point here, and certainly not the problematic power at play here.

      Deflecting from law makers, courts, and prosecution to just Meta is misplaced and counter-productive.

      • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        If there were actually end to end encryption on the messages, they wouldnt have the ability to decrypt the messages for the government when asked. So either A. Meta lied about their encryption, or they are lying about storing users passwords which is arguably worse as many use passwords for multiple uses even when we know we shouldn’t. If Meta is required to not use encryption then once more I agree users should not use them for any personal messaging. Which is what it sounds people are preaching against here.

        • Kissaki@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Was the form of private messages disclosed? Does meta claim end to end encryption on Facebook/Facebook messenger? That would be new to me.

          Having to provide back doors is another issue with the law/government and courts, not Meta or their power.

          IMO lying is not an issue of power as the commenter I replied to mentioned. They implied Meta was the perpetrator, the active part in all this. When in fact they either followed law or followed the law while being a shitty company. But they’re not the active part, the cause in this ordeal.

  • Thorgs@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Just deleted my Instagram Account for good. I have no need for any Meta App on my Phone or any other Stasi like Institution

  • patch1@lemmy.fmhy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    1 year ago

    I thought messenger was end-to-end encrypted, at least according to Facebook. How were they able to hand over the chat logs? The messages should be encrypted with a key that is itself encrypted with user’s password, which Facebook doesn’t store.

    What am I missing?

      • patch1@lemmy.fmhy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Actually that page suggests that they can’t access it. They’d never passed the security on it if that page was lying and they don’t encrypt it. Clearly there must be some kind of mechanism they can use to decrypt it for law enforcement. The technicals of that are what I was actually interested in from my original comment.

        EDIT: Oh my God I just figured it out. It’s not enabled by default. You have to explicitly turn it on per conversation. That’s terrible

        • jabjoe@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Even if you turn it on, they control the end points, so it’s not really any more secured.

    • Xcf456@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Presumably they maintain full access because they control both ends. The encrypted part would stop others intercepting messages. At least that’s how I’ve always read it

      Edit: I’m wrong, end to end does exclude even the app provider from seeing messages. So yeah, either not enabled or they lied

      • PrimaCora@lemmy.fmhy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        And on the official app it isn’t called end to end encryption or even a setting toggle. It’s called secret chat and clicking on it opens a chat from the original chat. The only difference I see is a little lock icon where an emoji usually is.

    • mexicancartel@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      To add to other replies, proprietary apps like messenger can also have backdoor access to your messenger app, where the messages are stored decrypted. I.e. maliciously taking the chat history from either ends of the end-to-end encryption.

    • ghariksforge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      End2End encryption is mostly a PR stunt. In practice it’s not hard to go around it. For example:

      • going after unencrypted backups (such as in google drive)
      • compromising or seizing your device
      • forcing the app developer to leak the private keys
      • forcing you to turn over the information by threatenening you with not cooperating.

      It reminds me of this XKCD: https://xkcd.com/538/

    • zzz@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      this is pretty disgusting even for Facebook

      Not really. I mean, what did you expect from a company that’s responsible for manipulation of two major, major elections (one in the US and UK each) as well as a genocide in SEA?

      And that’s just what’s known publicly.

  • kevincox@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    People are getting all upset at Facebook/Meta here but they were served a valid warrant. I don’t think there is much to get mad about them here. The takeaway I get is this:

    Avoid giving data to others. No matter how trustworthy they are (not that Meta is) they can be legally compelled to release it. Trust only in cryptography.

    There is of course the other question of if abortion being illegal is a policy that most people agree with…but that is a whole different kettle of fish that I won’t get into here.

    • Rhabuko@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Every country has the anti-abortion cancer movement and it wouldn’t surprise me if the shit gets more serious here in Europe too with the rise of far right parties. As a matter of fact you have only to look at Poland.

      • Grimpen@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        1 year ago

        Women’s reproductive rights are strongly supported in Canada, but that doesn’t stop one of the main national parties playing coy with a commitment to not reopen the debate.

        To be fair, it seems most Americans support women’s reproductive rights as well, with a referendum in Kansas passing with 59%.

        It’s gerrymandering and the Supreme Court that are changing things down there.

      • wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        This isn’t purely anti-abortion pearl clutching in this instance. Where this occurred it is perfectly legal to have an abortion into the 20th week of pregnancy.

        Fetuses are viable outside the womb at 24 weeks.

        They killed the fetus with meds at 28 weeks, the pregnant 17 year old still went through labor (with no medical supervision due to how they chose to do this), they burned he remains, and then buried them on a farm.