this post was submitted on 04 Nov 2023
115 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
37727 readers
578 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Why would the FTC even use Signal for communication?
Amazon employees were using signal to coordinate anticonsumer policies and then destroyed the records, which the FTC had ordered them to preserve. At least, that's how I read it.
So..... Throw them in jail? Make them accountable? Revoke the companies ability to do business till the records are provided?
Then again, that's just fantasy because the laws don't matter if you're Rick/big enough anymore.
I would like to non-sarcastically point you to my top level comment in this thread ❤️
Genuine question since the article doesn't mention it -- how does the AP know conversations were destroyed? I would assume a properly-designed, E2E encrypted app like Signal wouldn't leave obvious evidence of shredded conversations.
My guess is it is based on testimony from some of the involved parties that they had these conversations and then later the chat histories were gone? But I'd like to know more.
Moreover, do we know the conversations were destroyed AFTER they were ordered to preserve them and not just routinely destroyed?
My answer would be that the AP is just reporting the claims made by the two parties, rather than knowing that they were destroyed - that's the usual approach from the AP. I agree there's likely no "smoldering trail" in any logs that an encrypted system like Signal might be able to furnish, but I also am not read up on what kind of reporting requirements they might have. If they have to do something like SMS carriers where "a message was sent at x time on y date" logs exist then there's investigatory potential. But again, not really my strong suit.
There's probably some testimony or interview that we're not privy to that lends credence to these claims by the FTC, hopefully it will be made public as their efforts progress.
Can't say. My own anticapitalist leanings notwithstanding, none of the reporting on Amazon's corporate behaviors would lead me to believe that they are pro-consumer or unwilling to break the law in furtherance of avoiding a heftier punishment.
The FTC didn't use Signal, Amazon did though for internal communications. When FTC started their investigation, Amazon quickly used the features of signal to delete all their internal communications because they were too spicy for the public and the FTC.
I would have thought the FTC would know how to save the conversations.
Oh... I somehow understood the article as if Amazon used Signal to communicate with the FTC... Yeah that makes more sense...