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

Chat control: EU Commission presents mass surveillance plan on May 11

patrick-breyer.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 338 posts

Re: Chat control: EU Commission presents mass surveillance plan on May 11

#241

Post by munk-a »

citilife wrote: post #234
munk-a wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time" - Churchill There's a reason this quote gets echoed so frequently. Picking special electors to drive the government in a more informed manner is a dangerous path which includes a lot of danger around how to pick those electors. It might be nice if there was a way to fairly f…

The argument I've seen is making a national voting day (everyone's off), then they have to travel to a particular area vote. You can combine it with ID checks and/or proof of residency. All of which are minor, but easily doable and universally accessible. You don't need a test, just a little bit of effort to remember to bring your wallet and travel 10-30 minutes.

> universally accessible

Somewhat - these things take money. State IDs aren't free and neither are proofs of residency. ID laws are discriminatory against the poor which is likely somewhat aligned with political illiteracy but through a correlation in our current system.

A national voting day coupled with advanced voting would probably help our vote equality quite a bit and having the actual voting day be a holiday would likely discourage folks who'd rather spend a day at the beach.

Re: Chat control: EU Commission presents mass surveillance plan on May 11

#242

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0 »

thatguy0900 wrote: post #104
GaylordTuring wrote: post #83

In theory (and in practice today), I’m strongly against this. However, I see a future where you will have to choose between mass surveillance or something close to extinction. I might be wrong, but as technology progress, it seems almost inevitable that a single individual can do more and more damage. An amount of damage it took half an army to achieve a couple of hundred years ago, one individual can do today with t…

I mean, just based on evidence it seems like not many people are that crazy, and the ones who are are not in the state of mind for very well made plans. Already it would be easy to strap a pipe bomb with sharapnel to a drone and blow it up anywhere, but that hasnt happened. https://www.boredpanda.com/story-radioactive-boy-scout-david... most everything is really doable if you want to cause some damage. i think any ai…

I am close to a similar conclusion. Sufficiently determined individual can already do a lot of damage using easily accessible tools. Without looking very far, I can point to 'car attacks' in Canada or London.

And despite that ease of access to a tool of mass death, despite clear polarization of societies to near hysterical levels, actual crazies appear to make a small fraction of the population; a very visible fraction thanks to the media exposure, but a fraction nonetheless.

Most people appear to want one thing: that the day ahead of them is just like the day before.

Re: Chat control: EU Commission presents mass surveillance plan on May 11

#243

Post by caterpi11ar »

Ensorceled wrote: post #239
caterpi11ar wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, if you're willing to renounce the style of 14 year old who just saw their first Hitchslap video, I will offer you some Biblical and non-Biblical Christian arguments against abortion. Various Psalms (22, 139) in which the narrator speaks of themselves in the womb being created by God. The Gospel of Luke also uses the same word for an infant before and after He is born. It is also a heresy to suggest that Jesus in…

> Ok, if you're willing to renounce the style of 14 year old who just saw their first Hitchslap video Well, this is a pleasant, open minded start... but thank you for the references. > much in the same way that life-at-conception was mainstream biology until the moment it became politicized. I think most mainstream biologist believe that a fetus is living cells and, hence, life. Most mainstream biologists would not,…

Sorry about the barb.

Re: Chat control: EU Commission presents mass surveillance plan on May 11

#244

Post by citilife »

munk-a wrote: post #241
citilife wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The argument I've seen is making a national voting day (everyone's off), then they have to travel to a particular area vote. You can combine it with ID checks and/or proof of residency. All of which are minor, but easily doable and universally accessible. You don't need a test, just a little bit of effort to remember to bring your wallet and travel 10-30 minutes.

> universally accessible Somewhat - these things take money. State IDs aren't free and neither are proofs of residency. ID laws are discriminatory against the poor which is likely somewhat aligned with political illiteracy but through a correlation in our current system. A national voting day coupled with advanced voting would probably help our vote equality quite a bit and having the actual voting day be a holiday w…

> ID laws are discriminatory against the poor which is likely somewhat aligned with political illiteracy but through a correlation in our current system.

To get public services in the U.S. you need to have an ID, i.e. food stamps. It's a talking point that is not a real problem. Identifiers of who you are, are a requirement for free and fair elections. Otherwise, everyone just cheats and there is no democracy.

Further, everyone can get an ID, it costs $5-$10 in most states and most states will waive fees if you cannot afford it. Finally, if people can't get to a voting booth during a pre-designated, national holiday, then they don't care enough to vote. Even the homeless could make it happen, if they wanted to.

> A national voting day coupled with advanced voting would probably help our vote equality quite a bit and having the actual voting day be a holiday would likely discourage folks who'd rather spend a day at the beach.

The whole point of my statement was to present the argument (without judgement), the goal is to create a less equal and more discouraged voting system, bias towards those who actually care / follow politics. We want to limit it to the politically literate.

Re: Chat control: EU Commission presents mass surveillance plan on May 11

#245

Post by prof-dr-ir »

SiempreViernes wrote: post #85

I went three indirections down and I still can't find any actual quotes or even summaries of concrete proposals, so I'm surprised how many people can confidently judge that these unexplained proposals are a dumpster fire solely on the basis that they aim to precent child sexual abuse material... The most specific thing I found was a linked document that laid out three possible legislation options, all in very loose l…

As you can easily check, Mr. Breyer's website has been at the top of HN multiple times in the past year or so, and invariably the comment section becomes an anti-EU pitchfork party based on nothing more than the linked text and various unhelpful stereotypes. Comments like yours, which justifiably ask for a primary source, have never been getting the attention they deserve.

So let me explicitly go against the grain here: I believe the linked text to be fear-mongering and I also believe that the EU will not "break secure encryption" (or make it illegal) in the foreseeable future. And if Mr. Breyer or anyone else would like to convince me of the alternative then please show me some concrete evidence first.

Re: Chat control: EU Commission presents mass surveillance plan on May 11

#246

Post by ravar »

kvetching wrote: post #102

Complete and total invasion of privacy. They always choose the most egregious crime to push through a cecession of rights. If you oppose this, you are supporting pedophiles. But fuck them. Don't let them gaslight you. There are countless broken laws that could be caught if only they could see our data. How long until they force Google or Apple to report someone to the authorities if their GPS says they are travelling…

Think about all the american politicians who visited jeff epstiens island and then backed bills to allegedly fight pedophilia.

Re: Chat control: EU Commission presents mass surveillance plan on May 11

#247

Post by harabat »

logifail wrote: post #228
harabat wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For those who won't read the article: it provides a few ways to protest [0] (contact Commissioners, request media to cover this issue, get active on social media) and offers a list of arguments [1] (such policies don't work against CSAM but make it worse, while better/more targeted methods are being ignored). If anyone has experience calling to protest, could they share it here? Otherwise, the simplest course of acti…

> the simplest course of action might be to copy-paste the arguments given [..] Not wishing to seem defeatist, but is there much (any?) evidence that sending copy-pasted arguments to elected representatives actually achieves anything?

Probably little to no effect, but I'd hope it's slightly more effective than just tweeting a hashtag (which is arguable simpler than my "simplest" suggestion) because it will actually pierce the techie anti-privacy bubble and be heard by/bother the .

To be honest, I'd wager that most of the benefit in doing something as little as sending copy-pasted emails is that it increases the probability of the protester doing a more meaningful action in the future (by generating some cognitive dissonance, by reinforcing a positive internal narrative, by weakening the illusion of powerlessness, etc.).

Re: Chat control: EU Commission presents mass surveillance plan on May 11

#248

Post by SiempreViernes »

stjohnswarts wrote: post #223
SiempreViernes wrote: post #85

I went three indirections down and I still can't find any actual quotes or even summaries of concrete proposals, so I'm surprised how many people can confidently judge that these unexplained proposals are a dumpster fire solely on the basis that they aim to precent child sexual abuse material... The most specific thing I found was a linked document that laid out three possible legislation options, all in very loose l…

Anytime something starts out with "think of the children" (paraphrased), hold on to your wallet, your pocket-size Constitution, and pocket-size "rights of man". They are coming for your freedom.

I've heard there is a need to improve primary education, but you'd have me believe this is a ploy to steal my copy of the constitution?

Re: Chat control: EU Commission presents mass surveillance plan on May 11

#249

Post by caterpi11ar »

Ensorceled wrote: post #239
caterpi11ar wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, if you're willing to renounce the style of 14 year old who just saw their first Hitchslap video, I will offer you some Biblical and non-Biblical Christian arguments against abortion. Various Psalms (22, 139) in which the narrator speaks of themselves in the womb being created by God. The Gospel of Luke also uses the same word for an infant before and after He is born. It is also a heresy to suggest that Jesus in…

> Ok, if you're willing to renounce the style of 14 year old who just saw their first Hitchslap video Well, this is a pleasant, open minded start... but thank you for the references. > much in the same way that life-at-conception was mainstream biology until the moment it became politicized. I think most mainstream biologist believe that a fetus is living cells and, hence, life. Most mainstream biologists would not,…

When I was an atheist, I eventually came to understand that the belief that saying that a new organism created by two humans wasn't itself human was essentially a euphemism I could use to keep myself sane while still arguing in favour of abortion on social harmony grounds. But it is difficult to lie to oneself.

Re: Chat control: EU Commission presents mass surveillance plan on May 11

#250

Post by Macha »

d0mine wrote: post #145
323 wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> crack down on child abuse Actually today you don't use cracking down on child abuse as a reason, you use the danger of the far-right. All the leading left-wing publications, New York Times, The Guardian, Washington Post, CNN, Vox have been running articles about how dangerous encrypted chat apps are: > Why right-wing extremists’ favorite new platform is so dangerous. Telegram’s lax content moderation and encrypted…

Why Telegram is mentioned (which according to HN has no security)? Is Signal mentioned?

A few of them mention both, but generally Telegram has more users, and gets more mentions accordingly.
Post reply on HN