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

Key senators have voted for the anti-encryption EARN IT act

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 348 posts

Re: Key senators have voted for the anti-encryption EARN IT act

#331

Post by CRConrad »

ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #327
psd1 wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Linus Torvalds is Finnish and was studying in Finland when he created Linux.

So what? We were talking about companies not individuals. The Linux kernel is not a company, not a product you can buy and neither is Linus Torvalds. Plus, for the last 20+ years Linus has been working from the US while also gaining US citizenship. Case in point for US tech dominance, talent bread in Europe ends up in the US.

Bred.

But, sure, the US is acquiring European bread talent too: Sourdough, baguette, ciabatta...

Re: Key senators have voted for the anti-encryption EARN IT act

#332

Post by CRConrad »

jimhefferon wrote: post #239

US folks who are interested in writing their Senators can find information at https://www.senate.gov/senators/senators-contact.htm?OrderBy... FWIW, I sent the email below (largely cribbed from the EFF). Dear : I am a constituent. I urge you to oppose the EARN IT act, S.3538. It does not strike a reasonable balance between fighting crimes and the rights of users to privacy and encryption. The bill empowers every state…

> The states will be allowed to pass whatever law they want to hold private companies liable, as long as they somehow relate their new rules to online child abuse.

Ah, so child abuse is kind of the new interstate commerce, only for states in stead of the feds?

Re: Key senators have voted for the anti-encryption EARN IT act

#333

Post by CRConrad »

guerrilla wrote: post #255
MattPalmer1086 wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's easier to suppose that some politicians are paying attention to what their voters are motivated enough to write to them about. How much effect it has in the real world is hard to say of course.

I don't know why you'd think that's easier to suppose. Seems naive. How does listening to you benefit them? Listening to lobbyists, on the other hand...

> How does listening to you benefit them? Listening to lobbyists, on the other hand...

Listening to lobbyists (and implementing the stuff they ask for) can only get a politician money to try and buy votes he can use to cling on to his position. People writing in from his constituency, OTOH, are the voters he needs, and listening to their demands and implementing those has a much higher chance of directly giving him their votes.

Re: Key senators have voted for the anti-encryption EARN IT act

#334

Post by CRConrad »

guerrilla wrote: post #242
mcdonje wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's far more effective than doing nothing. Reps keep track of constituent correspondences and tally them by sentiment. It's one of their main ways of gauging where their constituency is on issues. I guarantee boomers who type google searches into google's facebook page are calling up their reps.

> It's far more effective than doing nothing. Is it though? I'd like to see the science on this.

> I'd like to see the science on this.

Why would you need to? Only if you are saying no amount of voter contact has ever changed any politician's vote on absolutely anything. Is that what you're claiming?

If not, then even a single letter changing a single vote by a single politician is already infinitely more than not doing anything, which won't even change a single vote by a single politician on anything.

QED: No science needed. HTH!

Re: Key senators have voted for the anti-encryption EARN IT act

#335

Post by labster »

bubblethink wrote: post #324
labster wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At my previous employer, among the 40 or so developer staff worldwide, there were only two of us who used Signal: myself (security focused backend dev) and the devops team security expert. Everyone else: just use WhatsApp so we can all communicate in the same place. Caring about privacy can be exhausting.

Well, Whatsapp hasn't done anything egregiously bad yet and they got a lot of goodwill/good PR from their E2E implementation vouched by Moxie et al. So what's the big issue with Whatsapp beyond that the client is not open source?

WhatsApp has already had multimillion euro fines for their privacy practices. Just because it has E2E encryption does not mean it doesn’t sell other data. A company whose business model is to sell your data is going to sell your privacy along with it.

Being open source is nice, but not required for privacy.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/09/02/whatsapp-has-been-fined-267-...

Re: Key senators have voted for the anti-encryption EARN IT act

#336

Post by tagoregrtst »

CRConrad wrote: post #329
tagoregrtst wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I speak three European languages at native level (Im ESL. Or is it ETL?) and can get along well enough in a fourth. I have the luxury of choice. And my problem isn't with Europeans, that is Englishmen, Ukrainians, Russians, or normal people in the EU. My problem is with Europes’ (note the plural, this isn't merely about the EU) institutions, the way they think, the mentality of what a person can do. At no point in th…

>> Which of the 27(8) countries did you live in, as they are rather different? > I speak three European languages at native level Way not to answer the question. Also, BTW, you're probably wrong: Very high proficiency, maybe, but almost nobody speaks more than one language (or at the most, two) at a native level. But, sorry, I digress... To get back to the point: Way not to answer the question.

Most don't learn three (and a half) languages by age 11 and use all three often. When I speak any of the three, locals think Im a native speaker and readily spot in what region I learned the language (if they’re good, the town). In any of the three I can also spot where the speaker is from and I can pronounce all the subtle sounds that give foreigners away. Sounds that even natives cant pronounce since they are not universally present in regional dialects.

Anyway, I didn't answer the question because what’s the point? I wouldn't live in Germany, or in Latvia, or in Spain, or in Greece for the reasons stated: restrictions on speech, blasphemy laws, anti-apologia of tyranny laws (commie or facist), laws effectively criminalizing self-defence. I also enjoy the self reliance of Americans; yes its exaggerated, but its more than Europeans anyway.

Ive flirted with Switzerland, but that’s not the EU per my original comment (I wouldn't live in CH either. Love ’em though)

Re: Key senators have voted for the anti-encryption EARN IT act

#337

Post by CRConrad »

tagoregrtst wrote: post #323
peoplefromibiza wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No, you go to jail instead for offending someone It's pretty hard to believe it. Can you point me to some example ? Is it what happened to you? Are you sure it was just an offense? In which country did it happen? > Any criticism of the EU or Brussels is far right extremism and must be ignored I was addressing the wording. Far right movements in Europe use the same slogans, they are pretty easy to spot, because they…

Italy, apologia of fascism https://it.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apologia_del_fascismo Austria apologia of national socialism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verbotsgesetz_1947 Germany’s the same Finland two years for tweeting a picture of the bible: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60111140 Baltics passed similar laws for communist symbols (so no Che shirts in Vilnus!) These are all laws against offending someone’s s…

Calling hate speech and attempts to reintroduce an ideology that sank a continent into war and killed millions a bland "offending someone" is so obviously bullshit that it's a marvel to me how you could write that without disintegrating into a puddle of shame.

Or maybe you did -- do you, at long last, have some sense of decency left?

Re: Key senators have voted for the anti-encryption EARN IT act

#338

Post by tagoregrtst »

CRConrad wrote: post #337
tagoregrtst wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Italy, apologia of fascism https://it.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apologia_del_fascismo Austria apologia of national socialism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verbotsgesetz_1947 Germany’s the same Finland two years for tweeting a picture of the bible: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60111140 Baltics passed similar laws for communist symbols (so no Che shirts in Vilnus!) These are all laws against offending someone’s s…

Calling hate speech and attempts to reintroduce an ideology that sank a continent into war and killed millions a bland "offending someone" is so obviously bullshit that it's a marvel to me how you could write that without disintegrating into a puddle of shame. Or maybe you did -- do you, at long last, have some sense of decency left?

And you have the gall to call Orban an authoritarian.

Re: Key senators have voted for the anti-encryption EARN IT act

#339

Post by pyuser583 »

Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #52
wmf wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HTTPS is not end-to-end encrypted (it kinda would be if we used P2P but we don't) so you can subpoena the server.

It is absolutely end-to-end encrypted. However, one of the ends is usually a server.

I guess it depends on which end we are talking about.

Generally, “end to end encryption” refers to client to client encryption, where the sever routes data but can’t read it.

Re: Key senators have voted for the anti-encryption EARN IT act

#340

Post by Gareth321 »

unicornfinder wrote: post #263
Gareth321 wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Apple would fight this all the way to the Supreme Court. This is IMHO a clear violation of the 1st amendment. I'm not so sure anymore. Apple of yore is dead. They recently announced a plan to scan local files on iPhones against a government created list of hashes. Only after immense backlash did they agree to "delay" the implementation. This had no profit motive for Apple. As a company, the move served to seriously…

To play devil's advocate, I actually suspect the reason Apple were planning to implement this was because they were intending to start using E2E encryption on iCloud photos, but to keep various governments off their back figured they could placate them by implementing this scanning.

If so, what a monumental PR disaster to not lead with that instead.
Post reply on HN