I’m a big supporter of Ukraine. But this is not that.
I see your colors. Ukraine, historically, undemocratic due to western interference. Made the Communist Party illegal and disbanded it. Very good democracy there.
They are very much the same, except Venezuela is better at defending itself from said western interference.
You are the one who lacks focus. This chain stared from this comment:
blocks appear to be part of a crackdown on internal dissent in both countries.
Or… you know… at least for Venezuela, the USA constantly fucking around with their elections and politics and local assets using Signal or something. Maybe, I dunno?
Do nation states have the right to defend themselves from foreign interference in their elections? What actions should a nation state take to ensure the security of its elections? What actions should a nation state take to combat misinformation spreading about their elections?
Based on your previous comments it sounds like you believe a nation should do nothing.
When preserving “democracy” is the excuse to not be Democratic, something is wrong.
Ah there it is. Its only Democracy if it comes from the democracy region of the west. Got it. Venezuela has one of the most robust voting systems in the world. Requires voter finger prints, signatures, national ID cards, and has paper ballot verifications. Meanwhile elections in America can be decided by some elite cobal system established in the 18th century by rich property owners for the explicit intention of disregarding the will of its people to favor the property class.
Lol do you know how to migrate a community off one platform to another? Its about disrupting comms, not stopping them. Regular people will find other ways to communicate, as they always have. They have lots of options, as you’ve pointed out. I have no failings in understanding here. I told you already, signal is secure. Its security is backed by it’s western intelligence financing. It has flaws in leaking meta data, just like matrix, proton mail, and any other means of encrypted communication tools. This move is to disrupt organized communication to make it disorganized.
No one needs to mention foreign agents. If you are able to observe and analyze the greater context for a given action you can arrive at an approximate rationale for the action. The west has a history of attempting to destabilize Venezuela, they back right wing dictators as successors, they regularly fund dissident groups who want nothing more then to violently take power in Venezuela.
Its clear that Venezuela is facing external pressure to dismantle their democracy, and are taking actions to disrupt those efforts.
deleted by creator
“Likely”? “For sure”? So you have no idea of the opposition is using them, got it.
And… That doesn’t change the fact it’s not widely adopted enough for peer2peer chat services without the need of a relay.
Is the opposition using those services?
Sure but if your looking to use a chat service, 45% is not a high enough watermark to have reliability. Its so contingent on the network operator to allow for an IPV6 connection. And like I said, places like AT&T have a NAT on their IPV6 network.
Sure, but ipv6 is not widely adopted. I’m behind a CG-NAT but can’t get an ipv6 so I have to operate a vps bridge to host my services. Some cell networks have ipv6 support but a few implement a NAT for it as well. AT&T only allows port 80 and 443.
Its not consistent enough to be useful without a centralized relay.
Signal knows who you are taking to. You can build a network of contacts based on that information. When you send messages your phone number is protected but your ip address is not, and the receivers phone number is not protected. So you can find two people chatting based on that information. The app automatically sends a delivery receipt when a message is received to the other user, exposing the senders phone number and IP address.
However, opposition in the country is backed by western agencies and NGOs, and likely their primary means of communication is signal since it’s backed by western intelligence, meaning, western actors believe it to be safe from external interference.
I’m not arguing that the west is reading messages. I’m arguing that they believe it’s a safe haven for their agents because they pay money to ensure it’s safe for their agents. If it wasn’t, they wouldn’t use it. Its the same reason why the intelligence community in the west is a large supporter of the tor network. They use it in the field and operate their own exit nodes to protect their operations.
I mean signal was funded in part by the US intelligence community up until last year.
Peer to peer apps do not work without a centralized relay to get you around the CG-Nat that cellphones live behind. So they’re not really peer to peer. You would be playing whack-a-mole with the relays, having to spin them up as they get blocked. Many ISPs implement CG-NAT as well. Its really dependent on how the network providers structure things. Someone from the country with local knowledge would have to test it.
If you walk without rhythm then you won’t attract the worn.
Lol Aw, are the geopolitics to complicated for you? At least your comments are here to show how you really feel about democracy.