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

481–490 of 570 posts

Re: Oppose the Earn IT Act

#481

Post by serial_dev »

kulahan wrote: post #270
apeace wrote: post #208

If you want to convince your friends they should support encryption, here's how I like to get past the "nothing to hide" argument. Imagine we're sitting at a bar, chatting. None of us have anything to hide. Then the government passes a law that all conversations must be streamed on Youtube Live, so an agent comes in, sets up a camera at our table, and starts streaming. We still don't "have anything to hide". We're ju…

The best argument I ever heard was: "Would you give up your right to free speech just because you have nothing important to say? No? Then why would you give up your right to privacy just because you have nothing to hide?"

Instead of "nothing to hide", we should frame it as do you have "nothing to protect"?

Without privacy, you, your family, or anyone you are in contact with becomes an easier target.

Re: Oppose the Earn IT Act

#482

Post by create5 »

apeace wrote: post #208

If you want to convince your friends they should support encryption, here's how I like to get past the "nothing to hide" argument. Imagine we're sitting at a bar, chatting. None of us have anything to hide. Then the government passes a law that all conversations must be streamed on Youtube Live, so an agent comes in, sets up a camera at our table, and starts streaming. We still don't "have anything to hide". We're ju…

why not just straight forward, "I do have something to hide, I do want to hide them from everyone, so what".

Re: Oppose the Earn IT Act

#483

Post by tumetab1 »

treis wrote: post #70
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?

>I guess I’m biased since this is essentially my whole livelihood, but this is crazy, right? There's clearly a valid argument from the other side. For example: >Facebook announced in March plans to encrypt Messenger, which last year was responsible for nearly 12 million of the 18.4 million worldwide reports of child sexual abuse material, according to people familiar with the reports. https://www.nytimes.com/interact…

Why would it stop abuse reports?

FB Messager report function sends a decrypted copy to Facebook AFAIK.

Re: Oppose the Earn IT Act

#484

Post by wirespot »

apeace wrote: post #208

If you want to convince your friends they should support encryption, here's how I like to get past the "nothing to hide" argument. Imagine we're sitting at a bar, chatting. None of us have anything to hide. Then the government passes a law that all conversations must be streamed on Youtube Live, so an agent comes in, sets up a camera at our table, and starts streaming. We still don't "have anything to hide". We're ju…

My go-to analogy for understanding privacy in the "nothing to hide" context is simple: "Do you have window curtains?"

Re: Oppose the Earn IT Act

#486

Post by ascotan »

zelly wrote: post #229

This is the consequence of companies like Discord letting child predators run rampant on their platform and doing nothing about it. There are two sides to every story. You can imagine how the government would react after seeing hundreds and hundreds of cases coming out of Discord, Snap, even FB. Reading the actual bill[1] rather than sensational headlines, you can see this is mostly about creating a tip line and bure…

>>>Not later than 1 year after the date on which a bill that contains recommended best practices submitted to Congress ... and annually thereafter, an officer of a provider of an interactive computer service may submit a written certification to the Attorney General stating that the provider (1) has conducted a thorough review of the implementation and operation of the best practices; and (2) has a reasonable basis to conclude that review does not reveal any material non-compliance with the requirements of the best practices

>>>Whenever the Attorney General has reason to believe that an officer of a provider of an interactive computer service has filed a false certification ... the Attorney General may issue ... a civil investigative demand requiring the provider to (i) produce any documentary material ... answer in writing written interrogatories ... give oral testimony ... furnish any combination of such material, answers, or testimony.

>>>The Attorney General shall maintain on the website of the Department of Justice a public list of each provider of an interactive computer service for which a certification has been submitted ...

>>>The best practices required to be developed and submitted ... shall include alternatives that take into consideration ... the transmission and storage of information on behalf of other interactive computer services ... provides the capability to transmit data to and receive data from all or substantially all internet endpoints on behalf of a consumer

For the last 10 years, encryption/privacy has become the watchword for people around the globe. I remember back when gmail was the first to use HTTPS for email and people freaked out. Today it's an expectation for everything and every service.

I think there are competing concerns here. The need for privacy and the need for safety. In order to keep everyone safe, we need to monitor what your doing. Some people will buy this, others wont. I think it depends on if you trust the monitor.

Its back to the 'do you have anything to hide' conversation, which I think misses the point. The point, I think, is that there is a fundamental right to privacy, that in some sense, is frustrating and annoying. It's the battles over WhatsApp, Apple IPhones, etc.

Safety and Freedom don't always go hand-in-hand. I remember watching TV shows/movies back in the day where there Soviets with AK-47s asking people for their 'papers' as they get on a train. Today there are armed police walking the hallways of my kids schools, at concert venues, TSA screeners at the airport, etc. There is a price for safety imho. There's a price for freedom too.

I'm not sure what the right answer is, but i wholly support petitions like this because they are the voice of the people.

Re: Oppose the Earn IT Act

#487

Post by addHocker »

apeace wrote: post #208

If you want to convince your friends they should support encryption, here's how I like to get past the "nothing to hide" argument. Imagine we're sitting at a bar, chatting. None of us have anything to hide. Then the government passes a law that all conversations must be streamed on Youtube Live, so an agent comes in, sets up a camera at our table, and starts streaming. We still don't "have anything to hide". We're ju…

The problem is with the monopol on violence the government is supossed to have. Today, anyone rich enough can have violence or the threat of violence, at a industrial scale like government used to have them. Bezos or Musk could have a rod of god in orbit, and you wouldnt even know.

And to prevent this from escalating, as artefacts are getting ever denser, in information, energy and potential - you get a panopticon. Those liberal ideas, where forged in a world, where the peak of energy density and danger was a musket.

This world is gone. To prevent it from coming back, we get the panopticon.

Re: Oppose the Earn IT Act

#489

Post by manuelabeledo »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #255
manuelabeledo wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I did address it, though the answer is disappointing: Only Google (or someone with Google's private business data) could give you that number. But it's absolutely much higher than they'd like you to believe. Well, that's pretty much wishful thinking. > Broadcast companies are already held to all of the laws and risks that Section 230 is protecting Google and Facebook from. Are they now. Let's put it this way: secti…

> Repealing section 230 _without_ a reasonable alternative would indeed held Google for a higher level of accountability than, say, Fox News. Under what law? Section 230 is a special exemption for tech companies. Without it, Google is indeed subject to the same laws as Fox News. Now, it's possible those laws aren't strong enough... but they'd be equally not strong enough upon both Google and Fox News. Currently, Fox…

Section 230 protects companies by not making them responsible for what third party actors publish in their platforms.

Name a single US based TV station prosecuted because some of their guests made false or hateful comments on air. Heck, it is in fact easier for the FCC to nail a broadcast company for "indecency", rather than hate speech.

Re: Oppose the Earn IT Act

#490

Post by Aperocky »

jjoonathan wrote: post #170
surround wrote: post #121

“A Parable” by Perry E. Metzger (1993) > There was once a far away land called Ruritania, and in Ruritania there was a strange phenonmenon -- all the trees that grew in Ruritainia were transparent. Now, in the days when people had lived in mud huts, this had not been a problem, but now high-tech wood technology had been developed, and in the new age of wood, everyone in Ruritania found that their homes were all 100%…

The people who want a skeleton key to open all electronic doors are the same people who compiled a blackmail database on their own high-clearance employees and failed to keep it safe (the OPM data breach).

My only question to this proposed act is how they're going to keep online banking and e-commerce working..

It's like shooting oneself in the foot before hiking.

Post reply on HN