• yeehaw@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    I understand that signal will stop, my point is why bother putting in preventative measures.

    Say there’s a law that says it’s illegal for Canadians to go to the united states. Say the united states has no border. Should the united states enforce border security because the Canadian government said so?

    Listen, I understand what is happening and I’m not in any way supporting it, I just think it’s odd that signal has to pull out instead of the Canadian government blocking it. You know what I mean yet?

    • Nik282000@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      If you have a weed vending business here in Canada, and you sell weed online to the USA, do you think that Canada would not sell you out in a second to the US? Many countries around the world are just as happy to throw someone under the bus at the request of a foreign government, particularly if it is furthering the erosion of personal encryption.

      And I do agree that the Canadian government should be on the hook to enforce their own laws but it’s way easier for them to put the screws to individuals and force compliance or voluntarily withdraw of access.

      Are there any Canadians on the signal dev team, have any Canadians contributed a bug fix to the project, are there Canadians working for Signal in any other capacity? Those people could be subject to legal pressure by Canada due to their involvement with a project that is willing to bypass Canadian law. Pulling access is the easiest way to project the project whether is it the morally correct solution or not.