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

Stop the proposal on mass surveillance of the EU

mullvad.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 534 posts

Re: Stop the proposal on mass surveillance of the EU

#351

Post by pelasaco »

Funny how every department has the same aligned discourse. From https://www.coe.int/en/web/impact-convention-human-rights/ri...

Governments can only interfere with these rights when it is specifically allowed by law, and done for a good reason – like national security or public safety.

People have been screaming for that since years, but because of the impression that was for a good cause, we accepted. In the beginning was the bad hackers, then the terrorists, then to protect the children, then because of nazis, because of people that dont want be vaxx.. I will post it again, Glenn Greenwald is talking about it in different parts of the world https://rumble.com/v25depn-exclusive-extreme-escalation-of-b..., so either we defend this rights, regardless of who is the victim, or the surveillance will only increase - everywhere in the World.

Re: Stop the proposal on mass surveillance of the EU

#353

Post by O__________O »

lo_zamoyski wrote: post #338
O__________O wrote: post #179

Strangest thing to me about the topic is that it’s obvious vast percentage of citizens within democracies wish they lived in an authoritarian country, yet choose to live in a democracy and use the liberties they’re provided to actively destabilize and destroy it. To me this is the largest issue, not a given topic that results from it. Yes, I am aware current authoritarian countries wage propaganda campaigns, but in m…

I think we need to slow down and look at this with level heads. 1. What is a reliable measure of this "vast percentage"? 2. Are you perhaps lumping any departure from your preferred political model as "authoritarian"? 3. Are you perhaps overattributing the level of "democracy" to your preferred political regime? 4. Have you considered the motivations behind the distaste with ostensibly "democratic" regimes? Simply de…

From the first sentence of the related post — “The European Commission is currently in the process of enacting a law called Chat control. If the law goes into effect, it will mean that all EU citizens' communications will be monitored and listened to.”

Level headed person would see that the next step is logically that all communications regardless if they’re in private, in person, etc should be monitored. If that’s not an authoritarian state, I am happy to be listen to why.

As for a vast percentage, I mean that topic like this would not even see the light of day if there wasn’t source of significant support; hint, there is.

I have neither have preference over given political party, nor would I be affiliated with a given group; that is, I am fine independently observing, understanding, evaluating, and if needed, acting on any situation as needed.

Not sure understand you point 3, please feel free to clarify.

As for point 4, I covered a possible reasoning why current democracies might be viewed as unjust; if you missed that, might be worth reading my OP comment again.

And yes, nationalism is toxic. It treats other humans as subhumans by default, that is non-citizens are not treated equal, and for sure not as citizens by default. If there was a country that treated all humans as citizens, equally, fairly, etc - I would be happy to reevaluate my beliefs related to nationalism.

And for your two cents, I prefer plain-English and first principle reasoning, not reference to historical ideologies, list of ism’s, etc. Said another way, I don’t understand what you hoped I would understand, but happy to listen.

Re: Stop the proposal on mass surveillance of the EU

#354

Post by cscurmudgeon »

O__________O wrote: post #334
cscurmudgeon wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which then is a true democracy according to you?

One where majority of citizens actively participate in matters impacting the majority of citizens, understand all significant views on a topic, and no entities are allowed have power beyond their own personal independent interests. As is, to me, America, Russian, China, EU, etc are all plutocratic — because the average person doesn’t want the responsibility of dealing that comes with running a society.

So what is an example then?

Re: Stop the proposal on mass surveillance of the EU

#355

Post by Seattle3503 »

ur-whale wrote: post #50
raxxorraxor wrote: post #2

The best way to deal with this is non-compliance and there need to be technical solutions to deny such attempts. One major factor that works against users is central authentication. Schemes like oauth2 might bring convenience and security in many cases, but will endanger net freedom overall. Google just added age restriction on blogger. Result is that you need to provide Google with ID information to access some cont…

> The best way to deal with this is non-compliance and there need to be technical solutions to deny such attempts. I disagree. While these are good to have, they are not enough. The reason is always the same: if you are found to be using the circumventing tech., you'll likely be in breach of the law, which will give the goons a legitimate reason to come and harass you. In a civilized country, that can translate into…

Sometimes I think we have romanticized civil disobedience a little too much. Not because having authoritarian laws is good, but because it seems like some people would rather be heroic resistance fighters than engage dry policy work and advocacy. It would be better to never live under bad laws at all.

Re: Stop the proposal on mass surveillance of the EU

#356

Post by rrsmtz »

stagas wrote: post #339
rrsmtz wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point of human rights is to protect the underprivileged - the privileged of any given society don’t need to have these protections because they are at the top of the social hierarchy and get to call the shots. They would simply use their influence to get an exception for themselves. That’s why the US constitution is great, because it’s such a pain in the ass to change (unfortunately the privileged invent “interpr…

Privacy though is perpetuating that priviledged class because they can do their shady business in secret. If everything was transparent, that would be harder to achieve. Also the "every human society that's ever existed" isn't true, because for sure when humans were nomads, you basically knew what's happening with everybody in your tribe, transparency was at 100%, privacy at 0. It's also the case today in many places…

It'd be great to expose shady business, but somebody has to enforce the forced transparency and that's a LOT of power. Whoever has that power can pretty easily keep privacy for themselves and their friends, use it to blackmail others, and enforce it more harshly on their enemies.

My point is that no matter what society you look at, the privileged get the nice things (like privacy) automatically whereas the underprivileged have to get it encoded into law, and even then it's not guaranteed. It's a rigged game, and the right to privacy levels the playing field.

When humans were nomads, we didn't have human rights so the point is kind of moot, but we still had secrets (even if gossip made it harder to keep them secret) and we still had a strong social hierarchy with privileged elders.

Re: Stop the proposal on mass surveillance of the EU

#357

Post by iso1631 »

DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #189
kragen wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

let's encrypt made a huge improvement on the status quo, but now that 95% of the web depends on them, they're an obvious central point of vulnerability for censors and spy agencies

...you're not concerned about all of the other Trusted Root CAs that ship in OS/browser updates? Why would the NSA/GCHQ/etc need to compromise a high-profile target like LetsEncrypt when they could bribe any of the dozens of companies names listed in my own local certmgr.msc that I don't recognize at all[1]. 1: I'm seeing names like "Actalis", "Baltimore CyberTrust", "Cetrum" - some of these sound more like pharmaceu…

I'm more concerned about why I can't see a list of sites that CA has authenticated, or put my own restrictions on them.

Taking the first one: AC Camerfirma S. A.

I suspect I've never authenticated anything against that CA. I'd love to know what sites it has authenticated, and maybe I'd be happy with a lot of .es sites

Wouldn't surprise me if I rarely if ever encounter 80% of the CAs that I trust. Looking through I'd be happy if some of the signed .ae, or .cn, but not .de.

If I did visit an unusual CA, I'd like to make a judgement call on that access. Sure, the big ones (letsencrypt, globalsign, etc) woul dneed to just trust completely, but having a "you are visiting youremail.com, last time you visited this was signed by Globalsign with a certificate expiry of 5 months time, today it's signed by Odd Looking CA, continue?

Sure for 90% of users would click though, and it shouldn't be an option for 90% of users, but I'm not 90% of users.

Same with importing. If I make my own certificates for my own stuff, I want to import my CA and trust if for .mydevdomain.com, but not for mybank.com, because I don't trust my own security enough to have anyone, including me, have a skeleton key to my entire communication chain for key sites.

Re: Stop the proposal on mass surveillance of the EU

#358

Post by browningstreet »

O__________O wrote: post #179

Strangest thing to me about the topic is that it’s obvious vast percentage of citizens within democracies wish they lived in an authoritarian country, yet choose to live in a democracy and use the liberties they’re provided to actively destabilize and destroy it. To me this is the largest issue, not a given topic that results from it. Yes, I am aware current authoritarian countries wage propaganda campaigns, but in m…

Most people voting/supporting these kinds of things believe there is a dastardly "other" that this will apply to more than it will apply to them. There are plenty of recent political endeavors where this was extremely obvious and loudly detailed and, yet...

So much of the large-scale political nastiness these days isn't because a rising minority wants to enforce fair rules that everyone has to abide by together. They want rules that suppress the opportunities of someone else and are certain that the rules won't suppress them.

You can argue that there's little difference between one side or the other, but it's like a game cube -- in one direction it's left vs right, flip the cube and it's rich vs poor, spin the cube again, it's majority race/religion against others. The dastardly part is that, say, the propaganda of one orientation of the cube is often accepted by the oppressed parties of another orientation of cube.

Re: Stop the proposal on mass surveillance of the EU

#359

Post by posterboy »

elpool2 wrote: post #283
jeremyjh wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does the first amendment have to do with social media companies?

There are people who would like the government to outlaw racism/hate speech on social media. The first amendment prevents that. I think r3trohack3r's point is that eroding those 1st amendment rights to outlaw hate speech would be worse than the actual hate speech.

I believe the general concensus is that it doesn't because private media companies aren't public spaces, so the company rules. How far the company enjoys freespeech, whether it extenda to their users and who gets to define hate speech I don't know, but lible is criminalized already and further analogies aren't impossible.

I mean, I could call a hackernews a punk ass neoliberal cunt and wait what happens next.

Re: Stop the proposal on mass surveillance of the EU

#360

Post by nforgerit »

zerodensity wrote: post #312
Laaas wrote: post #219

If this goes through I will personally leave EU, and I wouldn't be surprised if others do too. What reason is there to remain in the EU? It being a regulatory superpower [0]? Metaphorical lol. [0]: https://ecfr.eu/article/commentary_the_eu_as_a_digital_regul...

Where would you go?

As a German: It is good tradition to escape to South America.
Post reply on HN