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

Messaging and chat control

patrick-breyer.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 336 posts

Re: Messaging and chat control

#221

Post by karmanyaahm »

Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #179
tedcrilly wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Protonmail uses PGP and not "home-brewn encryption" and encryption is on by default between Protonmail users.

False. Even when it does use PGP, it is meaningless, explanation: I just created a spare protonmail account. It asked me to pick a username and password, and my account is created. Next, I send there a message from my other account. Yes, on the receiving end it does write "End-to-end encrypted and signed message", but encrypted and signed by what exactly? I have never created a PGP keys and loaded the public key to P…

afaik isn't it encrypted using your password or something when before it goes out of the browser

Re: Messaging and chat control

#222

Post by scrollaway »

slickrick216 wrote: post #4

It’s the same people who believe in medical apartheid that are bringing this in. All under the guise of the greater good. Who is it good for because it’s not for the publics. Law enforcement brutality exists online too and all over the world. It’s not simply a US phenomenon. Sickens me that they use children as an excuse. If they really gave a crap about kids there is so much that could be done right now.

> It’s the same people who believe in medical apartheid that are bringing this in.

Regardless of what you call your antivax rhetoric, this is utterly wrong. It's not the same people. There's no fucking correlation here beyond "politics is brought to you by politicians" so stop using an issue HN is upset about to try to prop up your pet peeves.

I too can start saying that this shit you're upset about is brought to you by car drivers and people who indent with 2 spaces.

There's a special place in hell for issue-parasites who do what you're doing here.

Re: Messaging and chat control

#223

Post by toshk »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #188
toshk wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even a representative democracy is a far fetched idea with the EU. Nobody really understand how the EU works, except for a few bureaucrats. There are too many proxies. You vote for a local party, then you find out they go into a coalition because the parliament is huge: over 700 seats. And those parties in one coalition have very different agenda's. Then you look deeper, and the parliament's power is very limited, an…

This got really apparent in the discussions around Brexit. Lots of people saying "I vote in EU elections", assuming that the EU elections work the same as all the other elections they vote in. It really doesn't. The EU is very much an oligarchy controlled by a small number of unelected bureaucrats. They've been very careful to not let the curtain slip too far, and preserve the appearance that popular opinion can chan…

Poland is having an awesome time in the EU. Get all the subsidies and trade, and ignore the rules they don't like: not taking any immgrants, going against EU court of Justic, etc.

"The most up-to-date statistics (as of July 2016) show that in 2014 Poland received €17.436 billion from the EU whilst only contributing €3.526 billion. Poland also received nearly €2 billion more in EU funding than any other member state in 2013 (France being second highest). " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poland_in_the_European_Union

Re: Messaging and chat control

#224

Post by effie »

White_Wolf wrote: post #12

I'm wondering how long until inconvenient people(or people with inconvenient opinions) are targeted for blackmailing material with a system like this.

That kind of assassination of inconvenient people is already being used for a long time. Just plant the evidence and tip off the cops.

This kind of legislation is for a different reason: to introduce pervasive surveillance of people activities and speech, and normalize the concept.

Re: Messaging and chat control

#225

Post by bennyp101 »

lijogdfljk wrote: post #180
anfelor wrote: post #98

The scary thing about this is that many people have images that look like child porn at home: Family photos of naked grandchildren playing at the sea or in the mud, as well as sexting between consenting teenagers. There is no way automatic classification can distinguish these from real child porn, because they look almost identical and thus many private pictures will be shared with the government. This not only infri…

> as well as sexting between consenting teenagers. Good god. I can't imagine the influx of in my view innocent teens suddenly labeled sex offenders because they did what all teens do, only virtually. This is going to be a weird time.

I mean technically that already happens in the UK - you can have sex legally at 16, but you can't take any pictures of you doing so until you are 18. So 2 consenting 17 year old teenagers cannot send indecent images of themselves to each other.

I seem to remember a case from a few years back, about a girl who got herself on the register for sending her boyfriend a picture of her naked or something.

Although it seems that the Protection of Children Act [1] I think (I'm not sure, it's hard to actually read with all the brackets ...) let's you do it if you are married (which you can also do at 16)

Any sane person would know that teenagers do what teenagers do ... having someone potentially going through those photos is such a strange and wrong approach

[1] https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1978/37

Re: Messaging and chat control

#226

Post by effie »

mark_and_sweep wrote: post #184

I'm surprised to read about this now. I feel like this issue has received no media coverage. Quick search for "Chatkontrolle" on the websites of some of the biggest German newspapers confirms this suspicion: - spon.de: 2 articles - sueddeutsche.de: 1 article - welt.de: 0 articles - faz.net: 1 article

You can't rely on big media to report on important things, and even when they report on it, often they push some one-sided narrative.

One other example recently are the anti-covidism protests - they never talk to the protestors, instead they just show the reporter in safe space with cops and let him narrate how these protesters are just a bunch of extremists and conspiracy wackos.

You need to listen also to smaller, less captured sources f news, and preferably several of them.

Re: Messaging and chat control

#227

Post by shigawire »

thegrimmest wrote: post #175
marton78 wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This has absolutely nothing to do with socialism.

This has everything to do with socialism. Socialism is about trading individual liberty, power, and ability to consent for centrally-managed services provided with government authority. This is exactly what's happening here. The ease and comfort with which this trade is made speaks exactly to the trend GP was referring to.

Socialism is not about centralized authority. That is just how it ends up when you have oligarchs needing a better brand than naked kleptocracy.

Re: Messaging and chat control

#228

Post by epidemian »

hhlbf wrote: post #113
WastingMyTime89 wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I do realize Switzerland doesn't actually use direct democracy for things that matter and when they do they often end up with xenophobic laws. I don't even want to talk about town assemblies voting on naturalisation decisions.

So if they want to be xenophobic, what's the problem? It's their country and they can do whatever they want with it.

I'm not sure if this comment was troll bait; i'm going to reply as if it weren't.

> if they want to be xenophobic, what's the problem?

One of the problems is that even if the majority of people within a country are xenophobic and they get to decide the lays on a majority basis, there will still be people form other countries living there, or people who in general will be disadvantaged by xenophobic laws.

It's nice for laws to not be dictated only by a majority, but by a plurality. Instead of thinking "what benefits >50% of people is the right thing" we can think "what benefits the most people, including minorities", or "what avoids hurting the most people" to be the right things :)

Re: Messaging and chat control

#229

Post by thegrimmest »

shigawire wrote: post #227
thegrimmest wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This has everything to do with socialism. Socialism is about trading individual liberty, power, and ability to consent for centrally-managed services provided with government authority. This is exactly what's happening here. The ease and comfort with which this trade is made speaks exactly to the trend GP was referring to.

Socialism is not about centralized authority. That is just how it ends up when you have oligarchs needing a better brand than naked kleptocracy.

It's basically about surrendering individual power/consent to collective decision making, isn't it?

Re: Messaging and chat control

#230

Post by matheusmoreira »

anfelor wrote: post #98

The scary thing about this is that many people have images that look like child porn at home: Family photos of naked grandchildren playing at the sea or in the mud, as well as sexting between consenting teenagers. There is no way automatic classification can distinguish these from real child porn, because they look almost identical and thus many private pictures will be shared with the government. This not only infri…

> The article mentions that 40% of CP investigations in Germany are started against minors (implied: through sexting), which shows that this concern is not purely theoretical at all.

I've read news about this. Teenager sends nude photos to her boyfriend, calls the cops after the break up and they proceed to nearly ruin his life by threatening lifetime sex offender registration. The implication that the girl produced and distributed child pornography of herself is never even mentioned.

It's completely insane.

Post reply on HN