[deleted]
Ask HN: What are your arguments in favor of end-to-end encryption?
201–210 of 255 posts
Re: Ask HN: What are your arguments in favor of end-to-end encryption?
#202Earlier quoted context omitted.
Comparing governments as bad actors (malevolent groups of people trying to retain and increase their power yielding already disproportionate amounts of power) to cars and diseases (inanimate objects or, well, diseases) is not a fair argument. On one hand, organized crime, observable in most countries where governments are present, on the other hand everyday objects and a disease. Doesn’t look like an argument made in…
You say it's not a good argument but you don't say why. I think it's appropriate, insofar as it's the very government that's made these things safer, improved the lives of their citizens by getting involved. The exact same mechanisms are available to fight both car deaths and malicious actors. Why do we trust the government to do one but not the other? (Keep in mind I'm NOT in favor of backdooring crypto, I just don'…
Government today might not be too bad but that has no bearing on government tomorrow.
Anne Frank's father had nothing to hide when he filled in the official forms asking his family religion and we all know how that turned out...
Re: Ask HN: What are your arguments in favor of end-to-end encryption?
#203I think that's the wrong question because there are many arguments in favor of e2ee. However, only some against:
1) totalitarian governments (like in China) or governments who want to watch over their citizenz (and non-citizenz) because of
2) criminals, who want do their stuff in secret - you may force whatsapp to stop using e2ee but you can't stop criminals using open source software
3) convenience because it's harder to build e2ee apps in many cases than without e2ee because you can't use some services (like algolia for search etc). At least, there are couchbase and realm.io, but their hosting isn't hat cheap
Re: Ask HN: What are your arguments in favor of end-to-end encryption?
#204Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure this is a great analogy as yes, we permit people to have doors and locks but society also provides a mechanism for the government to lawfully get access to them. If the Police have a legit reason to access a property they go to court and get a warrent, and if they need to they'll kick the door in to get in. The current government requests to be able to access encrypted info with a warrent are an extensio…
"If the Police have a legit reason to access a property they go to court and get a warrent, and if they need to they'll kick the door in to get in." That's what currently takes, place, Government doesn't have the keys, they have to use force to get in, or other methods. (However there are physical limits to materials, so there is usually a way to break in) But, by having a special key that opens all the doors, anyone…
well, there is kinda a key is that lets anyone in - in the UK they call it 'the enforcer' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enforcer_(battering_ram)
If an officer does something that should require a court order and don't have one then they end up prosecuted in the same way a criminal would be. You put checks and balances in place to make sure that they are caught.
Re: Ask HN: What are your arguments in favor of end-to-end encryption?
#205Politicians propose to forbid all buildings from having doors. After all "bad people/stuff etc." could lock the doors and hide behind them. Anyone arguing against that is obviously against safety. Counterpoints: - Do we currently have a big door problem? - Wait, don't doors also serve an important function? - Won't that make everybody much more insecure and basically do nothing against "bad stuff"? - What if I put a…
I'm not sure this is a great analogy as yes, we permit people to have doors and locks but society also provides a mechanism for the government to lawfully get access to them. If the Police have a legit reason to access a property they go to court and get a warrent, and if they need to they'll kick the door in to get in. The current government requests to be able to access encrypted info with a warrent are an extensio…
They can get a warrant and have a court compel you to provide passwords already. That's equivalent to locked doors. What they want is the ability to go through peoples stuff without them knowing (via court order or not isn't even the point). Its not at all like the physical world.
Re: Ask HN: What are your arguments in favor of end-to-end encryption?
#206I support it 100%, because I have everything to hide as my life is mine and doesn't belong to anyone else, including governments or improbable divinities. If for some people in power this mean I'm either a murderer, a rapist, a drug dealer, a pedophile, a terrorist, or whatever, they're free to spend taxpayers money to find out how wrong their assumptions were, then get voted out of their seats. Anyone using the "if…
“ If for some people in power this mean I'm either a murderer, a rapist, a drug dealer, a pedophile, a terrorist, or whatever, they're free to spend taxpayers money to find out how wrong their assumptions were, then get voted out of their seats. ” They don’t believe this; it’s an argument framed in a bad faith so that they can strip peoples rights and jam laws down our throats. Their mastery is in framing. Never use…
What work by George Lakoff would you recommend? The guy has like 15 books published ^_^
Re: Ask HN: What are your arguments in favor of end-to-end encryption?
#207My argument is simple: I want it for myself.
Re: Ask HN: What are your arguments in favor of end-to-end encryption?
#208You can kill someone with a hammer or a chair. Doesn’t mean we shouldn’t have them.
A computer can be used as a weapon.
Just ask anyone who has been hit over the head with a laptop.
Ban all computers.
Re: Ask HN: What are your arguments in favor of end-to-end encryption?
#209Earlier quoted context omitted.
They're not designed to maim or kill, just to accelerate a piece of mass. Police regularly use beanbags and target shooting is an olympic sport. Designing firearms spans all of STEM and keeps people employed well. If the US government wanted to reduce the lethality of firearms, they would ban calibers, not accessories. Even so, a .22LR olympic pistol is enough to take down a bodybuilder with one critical hit. So olym…
This line of argument is disingenuous. Blades are, at one level of abstraction, designed to sever fibers and occasionally other materials. A straight razor is designed for a human to use to shave hair. A nakiri is designed for a human to use to slice vegetables. An executioner sword is designed for a human to use to kill another human by decapitation. Likewise, many firearms are designed primarily to be good for shoo…
If that's the case why do such laws exist as foldable knives and switchblades being illegal to carry but sturdy full-length ones are fine, in some countries? Why is banning pistol grips considered having prevented or hindered lethality?
Re: Ask HN: What are your arguments in favor of end-to-end encryption?
#210Pre-telephone, almost all real time conversations were not available to law enforcement. That is the historical default. There was a brief time where phone and internet conversations were easily accessible to law enforcement. With the implementation of reasonable privacy provisions that is no longer the case and things have returned to the normal state of affairs.