zlacker

>>pera+(OP)
The biggest drawback with Signal for protesters is that it exposes the user's phone number to everyone else in groups (just like WhatsApp does). There is no way to even hide the fact that you have an account on Signal. I can add phone numbers by enumeration into my contacts and Signal will show who among my contacts is on it. If the authorities don't use tactics like they did in Hong Kong, the protesters may be safe from being spied on (or worse).

>>AnonC+ul
Signal is not only used by protesters[0][1] so discovering that a phone number is connected to a Signal account by no means implies that the phone is used by a protester.

[0]: https://www.militarytimes.com/flashpoints/2020/01/23/deploye...

[1]: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/dec/17/tories-swit...

>>hjek+7m
Yeah, if you're ever asked why you're on Signal, just say you wanted to stay in touch with a programmer friend who's not on Facebook/WhatsApp, and they suggested Signal (that is now literally true as well - I suggest you try Signal, friend)

>>m12k+wn
If the law enforcement is talking to you in the U.S., the only right answer is "I'd prefer to have a laywer here."

Not a joke, for real.

They are experts at getting you to talk to them even if you know this. They are experts at getting you to say things that incriminate you or your friends -- that you or your friends have done nothing wrong (in your opinion/as far as you know) will not protect you.

The only answers you should be rehearsing or thinking of in advance are "I would like a lawyer" and "I would like to remain silent." They are rehearsing how to get you to say incriminating things, a lot. Rehearsing or thinking up any other answers only plays into their strengths. Even knowing this, I've been tricked into talking to them, to my detriment. They are really good at it.

>>jrochk+5T
You should actually be careful to say exactly this phrase: "I want a lawyer" and not a word more.

> [W]hen a suspect in an interrogation told detectives to “just give me a lawyer dog,” the Louisiana Supreme Court ruled that the suspect was, in fact, asking for a “lawyer dog,” and not invoking his constitutional right to counsel.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/true-crime/wp/2017/11/02...

>>hkh28+x01
Okay, he was asking for a lawyer dog, and not invoking his constitutional right to counsel. If he kept his mouth shut otherwise, that would do him little harm.