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

Oppose the Earn IT Act

foundation.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 570 posts

Re: Oppose the Earn IT Act

#171

Post by xondono »

bzb3 wrote: post #81
ajzinsbwbs wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That scares me. If that entrapment-at-scale is legal, it could be deployed to throw huge numbers of people in jail for buying drugs or supporting terrorism.

If I emailed you and offered you to share pictures of naked 13 year olds, would you accept? If I texted you and told you I'm 13 years old, would you start hitting on me?

If I hit reply to tell you to go to hell, did I just participate in the exchange of pictures of minors? (since your pictures will be quoted in my email)

Re: Oppose the Earn IT Act

#172

Post by z3c0 »

Press2forEN wrote: post #148
lukifer wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obligatory plug for electoral reform. Lesser evils aren't inevitable; they're a product of a bad voting system. https://www.fairvote.org/rcv https://www.fairvote.org/alternatives Maine has converted to RCV already and it's stood up in court; 49 to go.

Let's say the US had 5 parties and all 5 supported 5 variations of the EARN IT act, what then?

Then we're choosing the lesser of five evils, except now, none of the evil parties alone have a strong enough electorate to squash any sixth party that emerges from the disenfranchised of the other five. That's completely unlike the current two-party system, where no third party can gain any traction due to not having a sizable enough electorate to take on "the big kids".

Re: Oppose the Earn IT Act

#173

Post by manuelabeledo »

tzs wrote: post #145
manuelabeledo wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sounds like the start of a false dichotomy.

Not necessarily. These bad bills keep coming up in an effort to address serious real problems, like child porn. People are going to keep proposing bills to address these problems until something passes. By just concentrating on shooting down bad bill after bad bill without devoting any effort to getting good bills proposed the next bill after each defeated bad bill will be another bill from the same general set of pe…

> Just telling everyone else what is wrong with their approach to solving a problem instead of also offering up your own better solutions tends to not work well in the long run.

How would you think the introduction of a competing bill would fare, if it still needs the support of the first bill proponents? Wouldn't they believe that anything short than the original bill is not worth supporting?

I don't think the issue is that there are no better ways to deal with, say, child porn. I do believe that many politicians, if not most, refuse to acknowledge that there are better solutions out there, and for that there are several factors.

Re: Oppose the Earn IT Act

#174

Post by manuelabeledo »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #165
manuelabeledo wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honest question, why do you think that Section 230 should be repealed? I myself believe that companies should be doing a better job at moderating the contents they host in their websites, but also that by repealing such provision, smaller ventures with not enough money to enforce the rules, would either go bankrupt or simply suppress any third party content to avoid issues with the law enforcement.

Tech companies don't just host harmful content: They make money off of it. The fact that Google and Facebook take a cut off malware, scams, and fraud perpetrated over their advertising platforms, while bearing no responsibility or liability for them gives them an incredible disincentive to shut down bad actors. A huge portion of Google Ad income is malicious content, and as long as they can't be sued or indited for i…

> A huge portion of Google Ad income is malicious content, and as long as they can't be sued or indited for it, they're going to continue to automatically approve and profit off criminal activity.

Citation needed.

Also, wouldn't this also apply to broadcasting companies? Say, potentially harmful commercials airing on prime time.

Re: Oppose the Earn IT Act

#175

Post by non-entity »

baddox wrote: post #159
gspr wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I, as a European from a country that elects proportionally (which isn't perfect, but anyway), cannot understand is the blank stare Americans give me when people point out that the two-party system and FPTP are the things that need to be fixed for the US to have a democratic future. It's like so many of them cannot wrap their heads around something being fundamentally broken . The same goes for Canadians and UKia…

Americans are deliberately and explicitly indoctrinated from a very young age to believe our system is the best system in every way: most democratic, most free, etc. It’s not surprising that even the slightest challenge to those beliefs would be met with blank stares by many Americans.

Heh, blank stairs if you're lucky. In my experience you're more likely to be called a traitor or god forbid a communist.

Re: Oppose the Earn IT Act

#176

Post by wnevets »

blintz wrote: post #3

I cannot believe that the one thing we have bipartisan consensus on is destroying strong encryption. I guess I’m biased since this is essentially my whole livelihood, but this is crazy, right?

Its being framed as a way to prevent terrorism and child sex abuse, it's really hard for a politician to come out in against preventing those things.

Re: Oppose the Earn IT Act

#177

Post by knodi123 »

DudeInBasement wrote: post #74

Why does this matter? The US government can force you to give them your keys, and gag you so you can't say anything...

Because what you're describing is a method for violating the rights of one person, and they know it's happening. What's described in the article is a method for violating the rights of anyone, and they won't even know.

Re: Oppose the Earn IT Act

#178

Post by mschuster91 »

ollo wrote: post #46
mschuster91 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As a european, I don't see any party that actually have american people's interest in mind. To be fair, us Europeans have the same issues with our politicians, with the exception of socialists, communists and Greens. Just look for the article13 fiasco. We're all being fucked.

The socialists voted in favour of Article 13.

S&D are not socialists, they're social democrats. Big difference.

Re: Oppose the Earn IT Act

#179

Post by hedora »

choppaface wrote: post #100
qppo wrote: post #40

To Californians, Dianne Feinstein is one of the cosponsors of the bill in the Senate. It really grinds my gears seeing our senior leadership from California take actions that directly harm our interests, both towards our peoples' freedom and our businesses. I feel vindicated for voting against her in 2018, because I thought she'd be out of touch with our interests as a state.

Send her an e-mail in 2 minutes telling her to stop supporting EARN-IT https://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/e-mail-me

Writing Feinstein is a total waste of time.

She’ll send a smarmy response about how you’re clearly an idiot for thinking it has anything to do with encryption, and how she’s proud to be a co-sponsor.

She’s been completely ignoring voter complaints for decades. Before open primaries, it was essentially impossible for her to lose an election, and she knew it.

I’m extremely liberal, but if the “recall governor Newsom” crowd went after Feinstein instead, I’d sign on in a heartbeat.

Re: Oppose the Earn IT Act

#180

Post by _hl_ »

godelski wrote: post #152
lukifer wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obligatory plug for electoral reform. Lesser evils aren't inevitable; they're a product of a bad voting system. https://www.fairvote.org/rcv https://www.fairvote.org/alternatives Maine has converted to RCV already and it's stood up in court; 49 to go.

I want to push back against this, and specifically fair vote. - What they are referring to as RCV is called Instant Runoff Voting (IRV). IRV is a RCV, but RCV isn't IRV. Think "Rock and Roll is The Beatles" vs "The Beatles are a Rock and Roll group." - IRV isn't that great when it comes to Voter Satisfaction Efficiency (VSE)[0]. There's even other RCV methods like Ranked Pair[1] that are exactly the same for the vote…

This was extremely informative, thank you for taking the time to write it up!
Post reply on HN