Hacker News Reader

If they’re fine binding their future to that of corrupt government officials, then this is certainly the right administration to take that bet with. Are their financials sound?

View on HN

What I meant was maybe they have a hidden de-facto binding and they're trying to break it rather than deepen it.

As for the other direction... I imagine that corrupt officials would prefer to have the deniability.

Failing to turn over proof to a judge would not particularly protect them, so that will hinge on them filing a (presumably sealed) exhibit in response to a judicial request compelling them to submit it. Seems a very poor bet to take since the judge is likely to reject any simple ‘data sharing’ or ‘crypto weakening’ order as not compelling the totality or even a majority of their business, which is ‘sharing public and private gossip between friends’ — a goal not materially hindered by compulsory wiretapping, any more than it would have been for Ma Bell or her successors. However, if the government’s order is dictating their actions to the degree that they have no freedom of action regarding this case in specific, then it could work. That seems a particularly unlikely scenario; it’s much more likely that they’re just witlessly pulling a judicial lever that an AI proposed to them, than that they are a true puppet of FedGov. We’ll see.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com