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

The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies

mullvad.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 425 posts

Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies

#181

Post by hoseja »

t0suj4 wrote: post #85
Fricken wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any institution's primary objective is to secure it's own power (the second is to expand those powers). It's as true for governments as it is for corporations, religions, and even the home gardening club.

Sounds like good argument for competition. I haven't heard of a case where a garden club expanded it's power enough to prevent members from leaving and establishing their own.

Depends on the definition of "garden club". Indeed, you probably could call early agriculturists somewhere in Middle East a "garden club".

Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies

#182

Post by atlantic »

feeela wrote: post #125
maxilevi wrote: post #7

Why every 12 months the European Commission comes up with a total dumb and authoritarian proposal and we have to actively fight it? It’s just tiring

Because the European Commission is not a democratic institutionen! Those bureaucrats are mostly announced, not elected. And each European nation is only sending those politicians into the Commission, that are unwanted in national politics. In other words: The European Commission is the autocratic reservoir for conservative politicians that were to extremistic for national audiences.

Politicians are sent to Brussels as a reward, not as a form of exile. Those who are most compliant, lacking in initiative, devoid of original ideas, are sent there, after a career in national politics. They're not unwanted, and they're not conservative. They are just obedient non-entities.

Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies

#183

Post by pmlnr »

teekert wrote: post #166

I keep asking, who is going to stop me from encrypting a message and sending it to my wife? Who, and how? I can only conclude that some utterly dystopian tech needs to be developed to uphold this law. Why is everybody so focused on the "Oh this is so bad!"... What if this law passes? It's completely impossible right?

how: by stopping you from installing the software needed, which is the part that worries me.

Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies

#184

Post by revelio »

faeyanpiraat wrote: post #169
revelio wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You won't be able to do that. Spam filtering exists and mostly isn't based on message contents looking real or not.

You can't use current spam filters to fight against this, provided the system is implemented correctly. Let's assume you send 1000 automated messages periodically, and they contain a mixed bag of normal looking (so that your genuine comms could hide in plain sight) and malicious messages (to make their detection systems sweat). All the messages are sent from the same origin (e.g.: a messaging app capable of this), wi…

Again, that's not how spam filters actually work in the real world. They hardly care about message contents. They care about how many spam reports users file and those are weighed against non-reported messages for any stable identity like phone number, sending domain name, etc.

Spam meanwhile is defined as messages users don't want. If users can't tell the difference between spam and non-spam then, by definition, the messages are not spam.

If you send lots of "legit" messages to people who don't want them you'll be reported as a spammer and get banned. Doesn't matter what the messages say.

Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies

#185

Post by hoseja »

throwawaylinux wrote: post #36
jay_kyburz wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a really dumb thing to say and it really undermines the power of every day people to have a say in how our world is run. The Government is our voice and our strength, and we are going to need that voice heard and our will exercised in the coming years. We need to stop undermining our governments, we need to get money out of politics, and we need to sort out our democracies.

Unless you can actually address what I wrote, explain why it is a "really dumb thing to say", I'll chalk that up to you being bewildered and terrified by the truth in what I say. That's okay, many people are completely subservient to authority, dependent on the government, want to be ruled and protected. I pass no moral judgement in my comment, merely explain why the EU is desperate to surveil their own citizens.

But it IS hostile and alien. It's an emergent superorganism that doesn't give a fuck about its component parts, just like the anthill doesn't give a fuck about its component ants or people don't give a fuck about their component choanoflagellates.

Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies

#186

Post by pmlnr »

tlongo wrote: post #122

Does the proposal include chat services that are run by corporations only? If so, how will that prevent people from setting up their own chat infrastructure for child-abuse purposes? Besides that, how about educating people on how to do exactly that: Set up their own chat service. That would put control in the hands of those people who are not only responsible for protecting children but also have the most leverage t…

> If so, how will that prevent people from setting up their own chat infrastructure for child-abuse purposes?

It won't.

Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies

#187

Post by revelio »

zirgs wrote: post #151
revelio wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah yes because we saw how easy it is to leave the EU for the UK even though it still has its own currency. Realistically current EU countries are locked in. They aren't allowed to reintroduce their own currency, but doing so is step one towards leaving.

They could reintroduce their own currency after leaving. Montenegro is using the Euro despite not being part of the EU or Eurozone. They can switch to other currency if they want to.

As part of leaving you'd be cut off from the ECB and that connection is required for the banking system to operate.

Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies

#188

Post by _trampeltier »

hutzlibu wrote: post #156
fanagra32 wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Politics already suffers heavily from not getting the best-of-the-best. Making it even less attractive to become a politician is unlikely to improve upon that. In the totality of all politicians out there that you have an opinion about, which fraction of them do you like, in terms of thinking they are the right person for the job? Do you think this fraction would improve with that opt-in scenario implemented?

"Politics already suffers heavily from not getting the best-of-the-best" It is repeated often, but is this really true? Number 1 trait of a politician should be honesty and integrity in my opinion - and I don't think that you can increase that factor, just with throwing more money on them. Then you maybe just get more smart people, who are in it for the money and use their smarts and cunning to extract even more mone…

If H. Clinton vs D. Trump or D. Trump vs J. Biden are the only choice for the most powerful politic job in the world .. I think they are really not the-best-of-the-best

Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies

#189

Post by wslh »

Returning to the Clipper chip [1], PGP [2], Bernstein v. United States [3], Cyperrphunk mailing list[4] era.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clipper_chip

[2] https://www.theregister.com/2021/06/08/pgp_at_30/

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernstein_v._United_States

[4] https://cryptoanarchy.wiki/getting-started/what-is-the-cyphe...

Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies

#190

Post by pmlnr »

jgaa wrote: post #168

I think it's time for me to look for a new home, and just leave EU behind to rot. Kind of how people leave/left Putins Russia. Unlike Russia (where Putin eventually will have an "accident" or die of old age), I don't believe the politics of EU will ever change for the better.

And where would you go? The US? China? India? An unknown tropical island with no economy?
Post reply on HN