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

The window to deploy surveillance-resistant systems is running out

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 330 posts

Re: The window to deploy surveillance-resistant systems is running out

#211

Post by Terretta »

marvin wrote: post #82
weljlkjlkerg wrote: post #68

It's painfully obvious OP is talking about a smart phone and a vax passport. You don't have to be "anti-vax" (which is a stupid stupid term) to be anti-vax-passport. The people pushing for vax passports have no clue what they are unleashing. It is absolutely fascist, evil and incredibly surprising to me that 99% of the people on this website are in 100% favor of it. EVIL.

I don't think 99% of Hacker News is in favor of requiring covid vaccination in order to perform everyday activities. It probably a double-digit percentage, but there's plenty of debate. I for one am generally speaking against both that and coercive forms of vaccination against any current diseases, even though I mostly consider it an irrational bet to skip vaccination. It's definitely a reference to smartphones, but…

> I for one am generally speaking against both that and coercive forms of vaccination against any current diseases, even though I mostly consider it an irrational bet to skip vaccination.

Hopefully you're also speaking out against seatbelt laws, helmet laws, laws requiring women to wear tops places men aren't required, and second hand smoke laws?

Generally any laws where one person's freedom of choices for safety, apparel, and air polluting activities bump into other people's rights to not be annoyed by you and not cover your health expenses. In principle, they're all the same principles...

For instance, it's unclear how to rationalize against mandates for triangles of cloth on one's face in a public venue when folks are fine with mandates for triangles of cloth on one's chest at the beach. In only one of those is the lack of fabric known to kill people, but that's not the mandate we're fine with.

This whole "my freedoms!" thing needs to go back to first principles, build it back up across all domains to what we think it should be, with consistency.

Re: The window to deploy surveillance-resistant systems is running out

#212

Post by rvense »

toss1 wrote: post #205
rvense wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This doesn't make sense. It's very obvious when you look at his movements in 2013 that Snowden did not want to end up in Russia, and there is absolutely nothing that links him to Russia prior to his revelations.

Look more closely. That's what I thought at first. Read what people who were actually in the intelligence agencies said.

Why in the world would I trust people who were in intelligence agencies?

Re: The window to deploy surveillance-resistant systems is running out

#213

Post by Beltalowda »

moonshinefe wrote: post #188
Beltalowda wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My concern is more with people in somewhat unusual circumstances who get "lost in the bureaucracy". I am fully vaccinated, but unable to get a QR code – digital or paper version. My circumstances are somewhat unusual: I moved back to the Netherlands after a few years abroad (I am a Dutch citizen), and due to the difficult rental market and not having a job (yet) I've been forced to stay in temporary accommodations. I…

No offense intended but if that's the worst that happened to you during the pandemic so far, I'd count myself incredibly lucky and be happy about it. People slipping through bureaucratic cracks is unfortunate but happens with literally everything, emergency or not.

> slipping through bureaucratic cracks is unfortunate but happens with literally everything, emergency or not.

Indeed, which is why we should think carefully about it.

> if that's the worst that happened to you during the pandemic so far, I'd count myself incredibly lucky and be happy about it

The worst? Actually, no; just the current situation relevant for this conversation. And there's always someone worse off, of course.

Re: The window to deploy surveillance-resistant systems is running out

#214

Post by throwawaygh »

giantg2 wrote: post #203
throwawaygh wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Have you actually tried depositing large amounts of cash on a regular basis? Sounds like a good way to get your account flagged and suspended. 1. OP said "make payments", not "receive money". Literally no one is going to give a shit if you make your mortgage or car payment in cash. 2. LOL, yes, I deposit cash all the time, including a quite large sum at least twice a year (charity events). Cash-based businesses are…

"Literally no one is going to give a shit if you make your mortgage or car payment in cash." Are you sure? To get a mortgage they check the source of your down payment and it cannot be cash. Seems odd if they don't also check source for payments.

> Are you sure?

Yes, absolutely sure.

> To get a mortgage

I said:

>> make your mortgage or car payment

Making payment on existing loan != taking out a new loan.

> they check the source of your down payment and it cannot be cash.

If you mean literal physical cash: the main reason for this is that no one involved in the transaction is interested in taking on the risk of carrying briefcases full of cash across town.

If you mean money in a bank account that is of unknown provenance: This isn't really an issue unless you make a huge lump sum deposit just before closing and have absolutely zero documentation regarding where it came from. Even then, giant sums recently deposited isn't a problem. You just have to prove that it's of non-criminal provenance. Recent pay stubs or sales receipts will do.

That has nothing to do with the money being "cash" or not, though.

And even then, it's mostly about access to giant piles of credit. If you don't need to borrow huge piles of someone else's money, then no one gives a shit. E.g., I've purchased property with a cashier's check, which is about as close to literal cash as you can get without major security risks involved.)

Re: The window to deploy surveillance-resistant systems is running out

#215

Post by rhn_mk1 »

3pt14159 wrote: post #134
choeger wrote: post #18

We are long beyond that point, sadly. We are right now in the process of a) becoming legally required to own and carry a particular kind of device and b) being legally unable to fully control said device and c) having that device explicitly working (again by legal requirement) against our own interests It will be interesting to watch how things will progress and whether governments or corporations will be the ones ho…

No we aren't. I don't have to buy a phone. Yes, the apps make the border easier for Covid, but don't be ridiculous. I can fallback to filling out a piece of paper. Furthermore, I can buy an [PinePhone, Librem 5, etc] phone and "fully control" that. As for c) that's been part of life since the government got the right to tap your phone or telegraph. Right now there are troubling signs for the direction of American dem…

If you find yourself in a state of emergency, you might be out of luck if you don't own a SIM card registered to your own name, plugged into a modem which you cannot fully control by law.

BTW, if you want to make a call over the telephone network, neither the PinePhone nor the Librem 5 carry a modem you can control. In both cases, the modem is a black box with non-free firmware that you're probably not even allowed to modify, depending on jurisdiction.

Oh, and it doesn't even have to be an emergency. You might find out that your hospital only accepts appointments made by phone, and will turn you around from the door due to COVID restrictions when you try to schedule a visit. What will you choose?

Granted, it's not a legal requirement to take advantage of your legally mandated health insurance, but it's a catch-22 that was constructed out of a clash of laws.

Re: The window to deploy surveillance-resistant systems is running out

#216

Post by flyinghamster »

egberts1 wrote: post #112
raverbashing wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> much of Silicon Valley would be "Ludds" No, quite the opposite They're the ones who buy "smart locks" then get locked out of their place because they dropped their iPhone in a puddle or the lights went out They're the ones who come with genius ideas like reinventing the bus with Uber or fall for stuff like uBeam because they're too lazy to plug their phone into a charger

That’s why Lockly.com has THREE methods of opening a smart lock. 1. key 2. iPhone 3. PIN pad.

4. Strategically placed magnet that either pops the relay controlling the lock or operates it directly.

(You can tell I've been watching too many LockPickingLawyer videos.)

Re: The window to deploy surveillance-resistant systems is running out

#217

Post by throwawaygh »

rhn_mk1 wrote: post #215
3pt14159 wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No we aren't. I don't have to buy a phone. Yes, the apps make the border easier for Covid, but don't be ridiculous. I can fallback to filling out a piece of paper. Furthermore, I can buy an [PinePhone, Librem 5, etc] phone and "fully control" that. As for c) that's been part of life since the government got the right to tap your phone or telegraph. Right now there are troubling signs for the direction of American dem…

If you find yourself in a state of emergency, you might be out of luck if you don't own a SIM card registered to your own name, plugged into a modem which you cannot fully control by law. BTW, if you want to make a call over the telephone network, neither the PinePhone nor the Librem 5 carry a modem you can control. In both cases, the modem is a black box with non-free firmware that you're probably not even allowed t…

https://www.amazon.com/s?k=home+telephone

Re: The window to deploy surveillance-resistant systems is running out

#218

Post by vinyl7 »

throwawaygh wrote: post #192
wizzwizz4 wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A life without a smartphone is already difficult. Possible, but difficult; it involves knowing people who have smartphones, and using fragile hacks, and doing without. With only “show the screen of your smartphone” proof-of-whatever being used, and the phasing out of paper documentation, it's not unreasonable to think we might end up in a situation like this. (Though, it definitely hasn't already happened; I don't th…

OP stated, verbatim, that smartphones are "becoming legally required". I understand the slippery slope argument, even if I think it's kind of alarmist, but... I mean, come on. Present tense?!?! We are sooooo far off from a legal mandate to carry a smartphone that I'm not even sure how to politely react to this statement. > it's not unreasonable to think we might end up in a situation like this. This is perhaps a good…

It doesn't have to be written law passed by a government for something to be "legally required".

Just like the government doesn't have to pass laws or implement systems for surveillance when they can just rely on FANG to do all the data collection for them.

Re: The window to deploy surveillance-resistant systems is running out

#219

Post by brimble »

rhn_mk1 wrote: post #215
3pt14159 wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No we aren't. I don't have to buy a phone. Yes, the apps make the border easier for Covid, but don't be ridiculous. I can fallback to filling out a piece of paper. Furthermore, I can buy an [PinePhone, Librem 5, etc] phone and "fully control" that. As for c) that's been part of life since the government got the right to tap your phone or telegraph. Right now there are troubling signs for the direction of American dem…

If you find yourself in a state of emergency, you might be out of luck if you don't own a SIM card registered to your own name, plugged into a modem which you cannot fully control by law. BTW, if you want to make a call over the telephone network, neither the PinePhone nor the Librem 5 carry a modem you can control. In both cases, the modem is a black box with non-free firmware that you're probably not even allowed t…

"Call this number from your car" was a common procedure, on arriving at a place, for much of COVID. Hard to do that without a cellphone (or a carphone, I guess, but who still has those? Cops, maybe?)

Re: The window to deploy surveillance-resistant systems is running out

#220

Post by vdqtp3 »

throwawaygh wrote: post #214
giantg2 wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Literally no one is going to give a shit if you make your mortgage or car payment in cash." Are you sure? To get a mortgage they check the source of your down payment and it cannot be cash. Seems odd if they don't also check source for payments.

> Are you sure? Yes, absolutely sure. > To get a mortgage I said: >> make your mortgage or car payment Making payment on existing loan != taking out a new loan. > they check the source of your down payment and it cannot be cash. If you mean literal physical cash: the main reason for this is that no one involved in the transaction is interested in taking on the risk of carrying briefcases full of cash across town. If…

> Lenders won't lend you money with a down payment of unknown provenance

That's actually incorrect, to my understanding. If you have 100k in your bank account for a year, the lender doesn't care when you pay your down payment out of that regardless of where it came from. They object when there's a recent transfer/deposit of that money because it could indicate an undocumented loan, throwing off the debt to income calculations.

Post reply on HN