Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s a true fact but why does it make traditional policing impossible?
What is "traditional policing" in your view?
Whatever it is, it isn’t a dragnet.
The EARN IT act is back, and it’s more dangerous than ever
341–350 of 520 posts
Re: The EARN IT act is back, and it’s more dangerous than ever
#342Here is where we are going:
https://dsignrandom.tumblr.com/post/675431677522329600/not-s...
I think that these bills will have not only a chilling effect over free speech, but also reduce the overall safety of citizens, both of which are truly bad things. And make no mistake, many countries will follow the lead of USA, UK and Australia in taking these steps.
On the plus side, moving free speech outside the moderation of big tech and, by extension, big-government, is a good thing. And that will happen the moment people realize that they are liable for CSAM crimes for posting photos of bread and having a stupid AI flag them, or referring to their cat as "my kid" in a tweet. People with a strong political opinion on bread or otherwise will need to find high-effort platforms to publish those opinions, i.e. magazines, books, and (eventually) face-to-face meetups. My perhaps over-optimistic hope is that this will attenuate the rage-by-tweet phenomenon, we will get back to thinking before publicly expressing something, and people will only get mobilized after informing themselves properly on a subject. Even if this is a "count your blessings" attitude.
Re: The EARN IT act is back, and it’s more dangerous than ever
#343Earlier quoted context omitted.
Law enforcement issues don't override all other concerns. If life is difficult for them, good. That's the point. It should be difficult in order to prevent abuse of power. Encryption is a perfectly reasonable reaction to governments that give themselves the right to surveil the entire planet. Nobody really cares that it makes their life harder. That's exactly what it's supposed to do. It should be incredibly hard if…
> If they want to investigate stuff, they should have to get warrants and literally send out operatives to physically compromise the targeted equipment. This puts a limit on the scale of government operations. This is how it's supposed to be. i think that's mostly right. i also take the controversial view that consumer encryption should have a front door for law enforcement. there should be a mechanism where if they…
Skeleton keys are impossible to secure.
Re: The EARN IT act is back, and it’s more dangerous than ever
#344Earlier quoted context omitted.
Australia. NSW to be specific since each state had its own response. But US law affects a lot of services I use. And I wish our government had taken a light-touch approach like yours. Dare I say I wish they'd adopted a philosophy of weak governance and respecting people's rights by letting them make their own choices.
Quoted post unavailable.
That was pretty bizarre. Raging coronavirus pandemic, more cases than we could count, and we can't let Djokovic in because ... well, he didn't have COVID so I suppose we were worried he'd catch it here (ignore natural immunity because that must be misinformation!). Maybe they were worried it would impact his tennis career. It was outrageously petty; my theory is someone in immigration had a bet riding on Nadal, because that at least means they had a rational motive for their actions. It isn't a big deal in among all scary stuff going on but it was emblematic of the times. Bureaucratic. Pointless. Vindictive against scapegoats.
Re: The EARN IT act is back, and it’s more dangerous than ever
#345Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But we all know Excepting the approval of end to end encryption and residential zoning, pretty much every problem thread on HN is littered with comments about how we need more regulation and laws to solve X or Y or Z. Wanting the "good guys" to have more power is pretty much the default response on here nowadays. I remember earlier- including before I had signed up for an account- when HN was much more libertarian,…
Honestly … times have changed. I was a optimistic liberterian once … I still am… but look at reality. You give people and bussines to much freedome and they use it for things that harm society. Facebook and telegram for example. Snake oil sellers where allways a problem but now it seeems to explode and destroy my liberterian word view :(
Just interesting, how does Telegram specifically harm society? By letting right wing freaks have their echo chambers there, or do you mean something else?
Re: The EARN IT act is back, and it’s more dangerous than ever
#346Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'd personally love to see social media shut down tomorrow Yeah, ok, I'm with you there... > ... by holding twitter and facebook liable as publishers for the content of every post on their platform, and letting them defend in civil litigation every time they re-publish their users' false statements for profit. Whoa there, hold on. If we hold Twitter and FB liable for that stuff, then that means we also have to hold…
No - I think there's a strong case to be made that FB and Twitter aren't like email providers or other forums like Reddit which are neutral in just showing content. Nor am I saying anything should be censored by the government. All I'm saying is that to the extent Twitter increased the viewership of some piece of propaganda, they should be allowed to be sued for damages . It's their ability to amplify that's the issu…
> All I'm saying is that to the extent Twitter increased the viewership of some piece of propaganda, they should be allowed to be sued for damages.
With potentially infinite violations and incalculable damages, it’s no wonder why no one who runs any kind of user-submitted content site wants what you suggest here.
Re: The EARN IT act is back, and it’s more dangerous than ever
#347While this bill is strongly opposed by the Internet Society, ACLU, CDT, and EFF, the critiques I've read don't get much into the real "why" behind this legislation continuing to be pushed so forcefully. The pretext is, of course, "protect the children" and more generally law-and-order with a bonus side-helping of "stop those awful social media giants." While these justifications are (hopefully) obvious misdirection t…
E2EE is offered to all users, whether or not they are law-abiding. More precise is to say that E2EE is offered to users who are primarily law-abiding. Your points are well-heard, even by those in the IC. What isn't occurring, is a good-faith discussion on solving the issues faced by law enforcement and the IC related to the growing entropy of E2EE wielded at scale by folks, a large subset of whom are engaging in crim…
How secure is E2EE anyway when, like WhatsApp, it's implemented such that you blindly trust a 3rd party to distribute the public keys and instruct your client who it should be encrypting and sending your messages to? How do you know your mobile app isn't also sending encrypted copies of your messages to a ghost user you have no visibility of? A ghost user that could be WhatsApp, law enforcement or anyone.
Re: The EARN IT act is back, and it’s more dangerous than ever
#348Earlier quoted context omitted.
What you are proposing is that the only writers we should hear from are professionals at publishing institutions, who have editors to vet their work and lawyers to defend it. That is certainly a take on what The Discourse should be! Return to the print media era, basically. But it is weird to see this take expressed in the same form it wants to end. Hacker News is social media and YCombinator is surely not going to s…
No, not exactly. Unlike in the print age, we all have the ability to set up a home server or distributed servers; we have the ability to reach anyone in the world. But we don't have a natural right to do that or extend our readership through someone else's platform. I can sit here and host whatever I'd like. In the BBS era, you were responsible for people posting illegal stuff on your board, and you were held respons…
The established social media sites have lawyers on retainer and will appeal every single case up to the Supreme Court if necessary, and as slowly as they like, just to slow roll those submitting civil suits.
Opening up user-submitted content sites to civil damages would ensure that the largest social networks are the only ones that can afford to fight these cases in court. Smaller sites would become self-censored, even if they weren’t likely to be a target of a civil suit. This would lead to a further entrenchment of the largest social media sites, as they would go to bat for their users at least some of the time. They have to be seen to support their users, or else they would just find an alternative host that isn’t subject to the jurisdiction of the civil suits.
This whole idea seems like a nonstarter, impossible to implement, and with a laundry list of unintended consequences and is counterproductive to your stated goals of reduced propaganda. Instead of being primarily on centralized social media, fake news would be relegated to smaller fringe sites where it can’t be monitored as effectively as on the larger sites, further contributing to the echo chambers you argue against. Your intentions also seem antithetical to free speech between willing participants freely associating.
Re: The EARN IT act is back, and it’s more dangerous than ever
#349Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quoted post unavailable.
That was pretty bizarre. Raging coronavirus pandemic, more cases than we could count, and we can't let Djokovic in because ... well, he didn't have COVID so I suppose we were worried he'd catch it here (ignore natural immunity because that must be misinformation!). Maybe they were worried it would impact his tennis career. It was outrageously petty; my theory is someone in immigration had a bet riding on Nadal, becau…
Well, since Nadal was let in only a week after he was tested positively and another healthy player processed „because people think he is against vaccination“ that’s the only rational explanation.
BTW, I wish you guys luck in opposing your government. Hope our don’t follow.
Re: The EARN IT act is back, and it’s more dangerous than ever
#350Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quoted post unavailable.
That was pretty bizarre. Raging coronavirus pandemic, more cases than we could count, and we can't let Djokovic in because ... well, he didn't have COVID so I suppose we were worried he'd catch it here (ignore natural immunity because that must be misinformation!). Maybe they were worried it would impact his tennis career. It was outrageously petty; my theory is someone in immigration had a bet riding on Nadal, becau…
If that can make you feel better, scapegoating has happened everywhere in europe, as well as canada. This is probably the most bizarre aspect of the whole thing (and can only encourage wild speculations): how did everyone loose their mind at the same time, everywhere.