[laserdancepony]

Why should a country tolerate an information system designed to circumvent the enforcement of the law, no matter how you individually feel about that laws. We boot fraudulent or illegal apps all the time.

What about an app that reports every LEO (not just ICE) around you? What would that accomplish except benefit criminals?

"Rules for thee, not for me."

[gruez]

>What about an app that reports every LEO (not just ICE) around you? What would that accomplish except benefit criminals?

Do you think apps like waze should also be illegal? What possible reason would you want location of speed trap except to speed with impunity? Moreover whether it "benefits criminals" is irrelevant here, because the current legal standard is imminent lawless action[1]. Otherwise that would be license to ban all manner of materials, from anarchists cookbook to DRM circumvention tools.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imminent_lawless_action

[CjHuber]

So how do you explain that the government of France for example publishes the exact location of all speed cameras online?

[FireBeyond]

How do you explain that it is illegal in Virginia to advise someone of the location of a speed camera?

[CjHuber]

My point was, if speed camera warnings are only for people wanting to break the law how would you explain this site to exist. https://radars.securite-routiere.gouv.fr/#/ sos it means there has to be at least one other reasons for warning people of speed cameras which is not breaking the law, or do you think the French authorities want you to help break the law there? I don't know which one but there has to be one right? As for the US I'd say with a cynical pragmatism it's because they are privatized afaik and thus have a big lobby lol

[akk0]

It's illegal to have navigation in your vehicle tell you there's a camera coming up in France, enforced and punished by high fines (I moved here from NL which has no such law).

[d1sxeyes]

True but they’re all signposted far enough in advance for you to slow to the right speed.

[DoctorOW]

> Why should a country tolerate an information system designed to circumvent the enforcement of the law

This is the party line, but in practice ICE is not acting 100% within lines of the law. Unfortunately, it's possible for politicians, and even entire government agencies to lie. The evidence shows that ICE has both failed to enforce the law, and even follow the law themselves. This puts ICEBlock within other crime mapping or offender identifying tools.

[CamperBob2]

What would that accomplish except benefit criminals?

There's an unbounded downside to allowing government too much power, including the power to act unobserved. Empowering criminals also has obvious drawbacks, but they're limited in scope.

"Rules for thee, not for me."

Those sympathetic to the American political right don't get to use that saying anymore, not even ironically. Not because it's offensive, but because they've effectively turned it into a tautology.

[samus]

Such apps can be forbidden by law, and then this would be quite unambiguous. This is criticizing a company bending over backwards to what the government wants. Not really surprising, since none of these companies supports free speech for the sake of it, but to further its business, but still.

[MichaelZuo]

“ bending over backwards” seems to be just an opinion, or collection of opinions…?

I don’t have a dog in this fight, but clearly there has to be some credible argument why opinion X is better than opinion Y (held by company decision makers).

Assuming it’s just automatically better isn’t productive.

[samus]

Indeed, an opinion held by legal experts, as the title of the submission quite clearly expresses. And on the other hand there is a history of Apple refusing other government requests.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple%E2%80%93FBI_encryption_d...

[MichaelZuo]

It doesn’t matter if every expert concurred, arguments from authority can not lead to opinion X becoming superior to opinion Y.

At least not in a logically valid way.

[samus]

A government agency can tell people whatever it wants, if it doesn't have a legal basis then it has no authority. Unless it doesn't respect the rule of law. It might and probably will follow up its orders with force, but that's still not lawful.

[MichaelZuo]

Did you reply to the wrong comment?

I don’t see how it relates to the prior comment.

[samus]

Indeed, an opinion held by legal experts, as the title of the submission quite clearly expresses.

[potato3732842]

God forbid laws that don't have strong support among the people be nigh on impossible to enforce effectively.

I have zero problem with fed-cops not being able to "do their job" in unfriendly jurisdictions without bringing serious amounts of force with them.

[jdgoesmarching]

So no country should tolerate Signal? If you’re someone who believes that ICE is only enforcing real laws and innocent people don’t need to be concerned, please get in touch with my bridge sales department.

[mcphage]

> What about an app that reports every LEO (not just ICE) around you? What would that accomplish except benefit criminals?

What if the real criminals were ICE all along?

[haskellshill]

What if drug dealers are good guys actually?

[tastyface]

"Federal drug prosecutions fall to lowest level in decades as Trump shifts focus to deportations"

https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/federal-drug-prosec...