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

Attorney General will ask Zuckerberg to halt plans for end-to-end encryption

buzzfeednews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

511–520 of 592 posts

Re: Attorney General will ask Zuckerberg to halt plans for end-to-end encryption

#511

Post by mr_overalls »

8note wrote: post #426
cowmoo728 wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was specifically "war on some drugs". Americans love drugs, and we even love dangerous or mind altering drugs. But some drugs, for various socioeconomic reasons, we have declared evil.

more specifically, to keep black people from voting

Sure, for marijuana. But not all substances are the same. If you've ever gone through the hell of having a family member or close friend being addicted to heroin or coke or other physically-addictive "hard" drugs, you'll see that they're not in the same risk category at all.

Re: Attorney General will ask Zuckerberg to halt plans for end-to-end encryption

#512

Post by sjy »

asjw wrote: post #475
IfOnlyYouKnew wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not entirely sure how those four examples are supposedly invalidated by giving them a clever nickname. I'll take the privacy side in most any discussion of privacy-vs-security, but categorically denying the possibility that some crimes could be aided by encryption seems a step to far. It's also bad PR strategy: anybody not already on your side will be put off by your apparent lack of reasoning skills. Instead, ac…

They are already using it and not on Facebook. It's silly to think that terrorists use Facebook Very silly

It's well-documented that terrorists use Facebook and other social media. There's a whole Wikipedia article about it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_and_social_media

Re: Attorney General will ask Zuckerberg to halt plans for end-to-end encryption

#513

Post by SamBam »

concordDance wrote: post #452
SamBam wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that reasonable people can hold both f̶a̶c̶t̶s̶ things in their heads at the same time 1. Privacy is important and good 2. It has almost certainly contributed to an explosion in the production and sharing of child pornography and abuse The question is what is the moral way to reconcile the two, not to deny that either exists.

Very unconvinced it's lead to an explosion is child abuse. Child abuse has always been happening (several of the older members of my family were abused), it just wasn't broadcasted. Even today I bet 99% of child abuse is never caught on camera. The increase from child porn is probably negligible.

If you actually read the article above, you can see that there's actually now lots of new evidence that viewing child porn makes people more likely to commit abuse, and that it seems to be a causal relationship, not a "marijuana is a gateway drug" relationship.

Re: Attorney General will ask Zuckerberg to halt plans for end-to-end encryption

#514

Post by sjy »

dbielen wrote: post #442
saagarjha wrote: post #5

> We are writing to request that Facebook does not proceed with its plan to implement end-to-end encryption across its messaging services without ensuring that there is no reduction to user safety. Oh, so you’re asking for more end-to-end encryption? > While the letter acknowledges that Facebook, which owns Facebook Messenger, WhatsApp, and Instagram, captures 99% of child exploitation and terrorism-related content t…

"Facebook, which owns Facebook Messenger, WhatsApp, and Instagram, captures 99% of child exploitation" Reminds me of this story: "Back during World War II, the RAF lost a lot of planes to German anti-aircraft fire. So they decided to armor them up. But where to put the armor? The obvious answer was to look at planes that returned from missions, count up all the bullet holes in various places, and then put extra armor…

How does this analogy apply to the competing goals of protecting privacy vs. detecting and preventing crime by monitoring private conversations? Which one corresponds to a plane getting shot down?

Re: Attorney General will ask Zuckerberg to halt plans for end-to-end encryption

#515

Post by wastedhours »

jacobush wrote: post #478
wastedhours wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't that right based on the statement though? The implication is 99% of the identified cases on Facebook are caught by Facebook's systems, the 1% not caught by Facebook's systems are tracked by other means. 100% of identified cases, not 100% of all cases.

Still very misleading if that is the case, what other means are there realistically to catch something if not by FBs systems, on FB? Self-reporting in the groups? Is that counted towards the FBs 99% or the 1%?

Reported directly to the police or other authorities? It's probably quite realistic in those scenarios for something that Facebook's systems have missed for it to be found by someone eventually and escalated.

There's a little ambiguity in there, but I wouldn't go so far as to say it's "misleading".

Re: Attorney General will ask Zuckerberg to halt plans for end-to-end encryption

#516

Post by sjy »

posix_compliant wrote: post #114
saagarjha wrote: post #5

> We are writing to request that Facebook does not proceed with its plan to implement end-to-end encryption across its messaging services without ensuring that there is no reduction to user safety. Oh, so you’re asking for more end-to-end encryption? > While the letter acknowledges that Facebook, which owns Facebook Messenger, WhatsApp, and Instagram, captures 99% of child exploitation and terrorism-related content t…

99% of domestic disturbances happen in private homes. Should they put cameras there, too?

There are laws authorising this, and they are frequently used to investigate serious crimes (like murder). They are not used for less serious crimes which do not warrant such a serious invasion of privacy.

Re: Attorney General will ask Zuckerberg to halt plans for end-to-end encryption

#517

Post by sgc »

loup-vaillant wrote: post #254
IfOnlyYouKnew wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not entirely sure how those four examples are supposedly invalidated by giving them a clever nickname. I'll take the privacy side in most any discussion of privacy-vs-security, but categorically denying the possibility that some crimes could be aided by encryption seems a step to far. It's also bad PR strategy: anybody not already on your side will be put off by your apparent lack of reasoning skills. Instead, ac…

> I'm not entirely sure how those four examples are supposedly invalidated by giving them a clever nickname. They're not. A number of horrible things will happen as a result of pervasive end to end encryption. However. You have to run the numbers here. On the one hand, perhaps a bit more crime, some of which horrible. On the other hand, the privacy of everyone . It's a hard sell. Just picture a politician on live tel…

> A mere inconvenience, suffered by enough people, is worth killing a few.

Wow. I can't agree with that one even a little bit. The real concern is totalitarian abuse. But being inconvenienced allows us to kill? That rings as downright pathological.

Re: Attorney General will ask Zuckerberg to halt plans for end-to-end encryption

#519

Post by spsful »

sjy wrote: post #514
dbielen wrote: post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Facebook, which owns Facebook Messenger, WhatsApp, and Instagram, captures 99% of child exploitation" Reminds me of this story: "Back during World War II, the RAF lost a lot of planes to German anti-aircraft fire. So they decided to armor them up. But where to put the armor? The obvious answer was to look at planes that returned from missions, count up all the bullet holes in various places, and then put extra armor…

How does this analogy apply to the competing goals of protecting privacy vs. detecting and preventing crime by monitoring private conversations? Which one corresponds to a plane getting shot down?

I don't think it is related but it is still interesting!

Re: Attorney General will ask Zuckerberg to halt plans for end-to-end encryption

#520

Post by tmerc »

sjy wrote: post #514
dbielen wrote: post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Facebook, which owns Facebook Messenger, WhatsApp, and Instagram, captures 99% of child exploitation" Reminds me of this story: "Back during World War II, the RAF lost a lot of planes to German anti-aircraft fire. So they decided to armor them up. But where to put the armor? The obvious answer was to look at planes that returned from missions, count up all the bullet holes in various places, and then put extra armor…

How does this analogy apply to the competing goals of protecting privacy vs. detecting and preventing crime by monitoring private conversations? Which one corresponds to a plane getting shot down?

"captures 99% of child exploitation" The majority of bullet holes are in the wings, so those need armor; the majority of child exploitation is through Facebook, so they need access to the content of the messages. It's an assumption made on incomplete information. The engineers only saw bullet holes in the planes that returned. And law makers only have information about the criminals who get caught. At least that's my understanding of the analogy.
Post reply on HN