Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Dutch government says no to backdoors, grants $540k to OpenSSL

theregister.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 101 posts

Re: Dutch government says no to backdoors, grants $540k to OpenSSL

#91

Post by dkural »

borispavlovic wrote: post #79
dkural wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone who disagrees with your policy does not make them a douche. This is the beginning of illiberal politics: If you are not with me, I will denigrate your person and declare you an enemy. The left wing of Europe was running at full speed towards Stalin / USSR for most of 2nd half of 20th century. It's easier to name-call than to govern.

You're doing exactly the thing that you're accusing of -- labeling. Just because you disagree with left parties' policies you're labeling them they were running towards Stalin and USSR, which is also not very logical since Stalin died in 1952.

TL;DR version: I use it as an example to illustrate why it's bad to generalize.

More: I don't disagree with left parties policies - I am a Democrat, and would most likely for left-wing parties in most of Europe (or whoever is less xenophobic). I am against tyranny on the left or on the right. I don't like people who support the denigration / dehumanization / oppression of those who they disagree with and marginalize an entire group of people. I can cite you dozens of statements made by the likes of Jean-Paul Sartre, Arthur Scargill, Jan Myrdal, Doris Lessing, Andre Gide, Bertold Brecht, and other lesser known political leaders intellectuals in Western Europe (that is, the part not invaded by Soviets thanks to US intervention), that is supportive of Stalin / supportive of USSR. I am stating a fact, not using slurs.

I am also critical of the right (or anyone, really) that support dictatorial/oppressive governments in Latin America and the Middle East. I am pro individual freedom, liberty, and dignity. I am against people being enslaved either by their own state, or by an exploitative economy through the invisible chains of debt.

Re: Dutch government says no to backdoors, grants $540k to OpenSSL

#92

Post by Arnt »

wobbleblob wrote: post #86
Arnt wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some people desire simplicity, and will think it into existence if necessary. I expect the author of those words didn't, for example, think about the Netherlands being a net contributor to the EU, he just knew it's a small country. In the EU, net contributors seem to have something awfully close to an effective veto regarding minor issues, so this is good news.

> In the EU, net contributors seem to have something awfully close to an effective veto regarding minor issues, Do you have a source for this? I never got this impression. Some countries have proportionally large influence due to their size, namely France and Germany. Some others due to the high quality diplomats and politicians they send to Europe, such as Belgium and Italy. Some countries actively sabotage their ow…

I read SZ (sz.de), which has separate articles about major issues and the occasional summary of minor things, e.g. when parliament is dissolved. "Other topics this year included: ..." Those other topics, the ones that don't merit separate articles, are the ones I have in mind.

Re: Dutch government says no to backdoors, grants $540k to OpenSSL

#93

Post by jacquesm »

As much as I like this I'm sad to say that we also have numerous violations of the law with respect to privacy by many branches of the Dutch government. Journalists have had their phones tapped, the schools and health care providers are asking for ever more absolutely private information about parents from both the parents and their children (this is of course 'for the children' so never mind the violations), finger prints of non-felons are still collected with impunity, dragnet style information collection is on the order of the day, there are no means of transport that are not under continuous surveillance outside of going on foot and by bicycle (and even there the little snitch in your pocket will tell big daddy where you are) and so on.

It's sad that we seem to be able to make the right decisions from time to time but at the same time we are actually making the wrong decisions most of the time. Here's to hoping things will eventually get better, I shudder to think of the kind of catastrophe that would swing the pendulum back the other way and turn the tide.

Re: Dutch government says no to backdoors, grants $540k to OpenSSL

#94

Post by omarforgotpwd »

rsync wrote: post #81
omarforgotpwd wrote: post #9

The danger of critical infrastructure being attacked digitally is already far greater than the risk of say, a bomb attack. Weakening our digital defenses to spy on terrorists is like throwing your laptop in the pool because you're afraid someone might light it on fire.

"The danger of critical infrastructure being attacked digitally is already far greater than the risk of say, a bomb attack." This is not true. However, it is important to keep in mind that were it ever true it would be because of blatant negligence on the part of human actors. It is neither obvious nor inevitable that a nuclear plant will ever be attacked digitally because a nuclear plant need not be networked - even…

What I mean is "the potential for damage is far greater". Getting access to the right persons email account could shut down roads, power, communication, etc.

Re: Dutch government says no to backdoors, grants $540k to OpenSSL

#98

Post by clentaminator »

jacquesm wrote: post #93

As much as I like this I'm sad to say that we also have numerous violations of the law with respect to privacy by many branches of the Dutch government. Journalists have had their phones tapped, the schools and health care providers are asking for ever more absolutely private information about parents from both the parents and their children (this is of course 'for the children' so never mind the violations), finger…

I think part of the reason why it seems that we're making the wrong decisions most of the time is that the actual decision-making is less obvious in a lot of situations.

While everybody knows that their mobile phone can be/is tracked as it moves between cell towers, it's far less obvious than an explicit vote for or against some kind of invasion of privacy.

In which case, raising awareness so that people can actively override the decisions being made for them seems like a good place to start.

Re: Dutch government says no to backdoors, grants $540k to OpenSSL

#99

Post by speleding »

jacquesm wrote: post #93

As much as I like this I'm sad to say that we also have numerous violations of the law with respect to privacy by many branches of the Dutch government. Journalists have had their phones tapped, the schools and health care providers are asking for ever more absolutely private information about parents from both the parents and their children (this is of course 'for the children' so never mind the violations), finger…

I agree with most of your points, but why do you think "finger print collection of non-felons" is a problem? There are well-documented examples of that database being used to catch bad guys, and I have not heard of any abuses of that database. So I would think this is one example where a small privacy incursion is offset by a proven gain in security.

I would go as far as saying that collection of fingerprints and DNA profiles should be expanded. I have enough trust in Dutch democracy to change it back again if it turns out not to improve security after all. (As someone who has lived in other countries, I would not say the same of any democracy).

Re: Dutch government says no to backdoors, grants $540k to OpenSSL

#100

Post by megablast »

speleding wrote: post #99
jacquesm wrote: post #93

As much as I like this I'm sad to say that we also have numerous violations of the law with respect to privacy by many branches of the Dutch government. Journalists have had their phones tapped, the schools and health care providers are asking for ever more absolutely private information about parents from both the parents and their children (this is of course 'for the children' so never mind the violations), finger…

I agree with most of your points, but why do you think "finger print collection of non-felons" is a problem? There are well-documented examples of that database being used to catch bad guys, and I have not heard of any abuses of that database. So I would think this is one example where a small privacy incursion is offset by a proven gain in security. I would go as far as saying that collection of fingerprints and DNA…

Are you being serious? Do you understand what we are fighting for here?

What if one day, it becomes illegal to be gay? Or have sex with someone out of wedlock?

Then all this data could be used against someone.

Post reply on HN