Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 8th Jun 2013 17:02 UTC
Legal I didn't want to put this in the article on the coordinated PR campaign, but the fact that one company refuses to cooperate with the US government in the way Apple, Facebook, Google, Microsoft, and others were more than willing to do, is very, very important. This means that the argument "but we had to do the things we did because Washington told us to" holds no water. Twitter's refusal proves that the others did not have to say yes - they chose to do so. Whenever someone - a corporate PR person, company blogger, or fanboy - tells you Microsoft, Apple, or Google had no choice, all you need to say is "Twitter".
Thread beginning with comment 564170
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Twitter isn't a good guy
by unclefester on Sun 9th Jun 2013 02:09 UTC
Member since:

Twitter feeds are publicly broadcast. The security agencies can follow any feed they wish without needing access to private information.

Reply Score: 6

RE: Twitter isn't a good guy
by Laurence on Sun 9th Jun 2013 11:12 in reply to "Twitter isn't a good guy"
Laurence Member since:

There's a lot of information on Twitter that isn't publicly broadcast (or at least not everyone anyway).

In Twitter can work a lot like Facebook or Google+ in that you can have "protected tweets"[1] that only people you've authorized can view.

I'm pretty sure the NSA would be more interested in protected tweets than the stuff that any "terrorists" were happy to blindly tell the world.


Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Twitter isn't a good guy
by pepa on Mon 10th Jun 2013 06:49 in reply to "RE: Twitter isn't a good guy"
pepa Member since:

Are protected tweets only reaching people in a secure and encrypted way, or do they just happen to be only sent to approved subscribers?? In the latter case, I think it would be peanuts for the NSA to listen in.

Reply Parent Score: 2