Earlier quoted context omitted.
Eternal September, when big social media sites get big enough you will find larpers and bots including Hacker News.
Even so, the larpers and bots seem more authoritarian now.
Stop the proposal on mass surveillance of the EU
301–310 of 534 posts
Re: Stop the proposal on mass surveillance of the EU
#302Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We probably all know that they will show reasons [...], whereas the real motivation is to control people's freedom of speech and communication even though they will 100% deny it. I don't think this is how it works, absent an already existent police state. In democracies, it really is pushed for {good reasons}. Once built, it's then used by law enforcement, because it exists and gets the job done. Pretending there's…
The reason is, and always has been, to enable lazy police work. They won't have to do their jobs if facebook will just tell them who the criminals are.
Re: Stop the proposal on mass surveillance of the EU
#303TBH, I think we've lost every opportunity to correct this. And I'd be happy to be wrong
Re: Stop the proposal on mass surveillance of the EU
#304We certainly need decentralized systems that cannot be controlled by EU, US, or any government/entity. Privacy is a human right. We probably all know that they will show reasons like "fighting terrorism", "preventing national threats" or "hunting down child pornography" etc, whereas the real motivation is to control people's freedom of speech and communication even though they will 100% deny it. Anyone who is really…
I believe you where talking about secrecy.
WhatsApp chats are secret, but not necessarily private.
Authorities can ask Meta to release the meta data and they can inspect phones to retrieve the chat logs.
Private communications have never been secret, it was always possible for the people with the necessary authorizations to access them.
Privacy is consensual, secrecy is not.
But there is no right to secrecy.
As much as I love mullvad and their excellent products, they never link the proposal they talk about in that page, which hinders the people' ability to form their own opinion.
All the material we can find revolves around the same actors, quoting each other, some like the Pirate party, say it was leaked
Leaked Commission paper EU mass surveillance plans
https://european-pirateparty.eu/chat-control-leaked-commissi...
But it's not true, it's officially published on the EU website, it wasn't being kept hidden, it had to be translated to all the EU official languages before being published.
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=COM%3A20...
I understand being concerned, what I do not understand is being catastrophic.
Even if everything they wrote was true, a proposal is not a law, so whatever happened in the Swedish parliament, was not influenced by the EU proposal.
p.s. the system is similar to CSAM, which I don't like either, but sooner or later such systems will be everywhere, like it or not.
The discussion must be held in a way or another.
Apple too considered scanning the users' devices to match CSAM pictures, they dropped it, for now, but probably only because they are developing their own system, independent from the government, so they don't have to give them any kind of access.
Here the discussion is being held in public, by people elected by European citizens directly with their vote, these people are paid exactly to discuss these matters, theya re doing their job.
You wrote "the real motivation is to control people's freedom of speech and communication even though they will 100% deny it." but the they you mention are elected officials, not SP.E.C.T.R.E. evil agents
Re: Stop the proposal on mass surveillance of the EU
#305Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We certainly need decentralized systems that cannot be controlled by EU, US, or any government/entity. I used to think this way, and still do to a degree... but it's not enough. The idea of zero trust as an absolute is flawed, because if the adversary is your own government they will just keep shifting targets. Lets play this out: 1. Gov start monitoring all proprietary messaging platforms and services. So lets ass…
IMO, your hypothetical falls apart at the second point: > Now gov mandate that all hardware must have have backdoors to circumvent those measures. A government could legislate that it may not rain anywhere in the country on Tuesdays, but executing that isn't practicable. Likewise, backdooring one family of CPUs may be possible, but you can't simply tell chip fabs to backdoor each and every design. They'd grind to a h…
Re: Stop the proposal on mass surveillance of the EU
#306Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We probably all know that they will show reasons [...], whereas the real motivation is to control people's freedom of speech and communication even though they will 100% deny it. I don't think this is how it works, absent an already existent police state. In democracies, it really is pushed for {good reasons}. Once built, it's then used by law enforcement, because it exists and gets the job done. Pretending there's…
It doesn't need to be a "World New Order" for three letter agencies lobbying to increase surveillance, and hence their power over the people. You are right, bureaucrats are clueless, but they don't need to be sharp, the agencies that will benefit from violating people's privacy and right already are. The is no possible good coming from those laws, the argument of "saving the children" falls flat, because you could ex…
Putting aside the distracting CSAM branding, I can think of at least five good ones.
None of which I'd personally value over freedom, but it's disingenuous and a failure of understanding your opponent to pretend benefits don't exist.
Re: Stop the proposal on mass surveillance of the EU
#307Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We probably all know that they will show reasons [...], whereas the real motivation is to control people's freedom of speech and communication even though they will 100% deny it. I don't think this is how it works, absent an already existent police state. In democracies, it really is pushed for {good reasons}. Once built, it's then used by law enforcement, because it exists and gets the job done. Pretending there's…
>listen to the loudest and most organized group I donate money to the EFF in the hope that they turn out to be this group eventually
Re: Stop the proposal on mass surveillance of the EU
#308Earlier quoted context omitted.
Gen-Xer here: Napster was never made illegal Napster lost several lawsuits in the US and filed for bankruptcy But Napster the brand was sold to Roxio and continued operations it's still active today https://www.napster.com/ Anyway, in retrospective, Napster times were fun, university networks were clogged by students downloading music all day long and, at least in my country, many people bought a dial up internet con…
"never made illegal" but "lost everal lawsuits", got it
Re: Stop the proposal on mass surveillance of the EU
#309Earlier quoted context omitted.
I dont think it will be a "secret cabal". It will simply be a bunch of powerful people arguing that their personal interests are the national/global interest. And believing this whether its true or not. And institutions falling in line with this. You see this kind of attitude at a lower level on HN, for example, all the time. And this flaw in human nature only grows the more powerful you become.
When I was in IT, the rule was 'no essential businesses processes in Excel unless defined and approved' to ensure 1. The formulas were actually correct and 2. We could provide continuity should the person leave 3. These items were included in corporate backups not just user level ones, etc. Hardly anyone followed that process. People are going to use the easiest/best/quickest tools available to get their job done. Ad…
Re: Stop the proposal on mass surveillance of the EU
#310We certainly need decentralized systems that cannot be controlled by EU, US, or any government/entity. Privacy is a human right. We probably all know that they will show reasons like "fighting terrorism", "preventing national threats" or "hunting down child pornography" etc, whereas the real motivation is to control people's freedom of speech and communication even though they will 100% deny it. Anyone who is really…
>Anyone who is really into something illegal will use something alternative anyway. That's the hard part, IMO. Imagine that we really got that "decentralized system that cannot be controlled" going and everyone is using it. Everyone, including those who is into illegal things. And they don't get caught. Now the government starts to push their "this decentralized shit is doing more harm than good" agenda. Whatever the…
Now, I have a cryptography library to polish.