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

EU Commission doesn't understand what's written in its own chat control bill

mullvad.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 219 posts

Re: EU Commission doesn't understand what's written in its own chat control bill

#201

Post by krimpenrik »

throwawaylinux wrote: post #161
dmix wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s to easy to explain away this stuff as merely gov deception fooling people. But I’ve seen far too many well educated people on HN making arguments in favour of this stuff. They always have their pet emergencies that are unlike other times in history requiring compromise now and a naive trust in the good intentions of local politicians, who often do care about some real present issue, but lack the capacity to see…

The "well educated people on HN" are some of the most meekly subservient to government authority and blind cheerleaders of its power I've ever encountered, and there is a strong scorn and open hatred for lesser "deplorable" classes of society with incorrect opinions who they need government protection from.

It has come to my attention as well that the more higher educated people in my circles are more blind to the power grab that is happening by government here. Topics around housing, energy, immigration, covid, EU policy, nitrogen ect are blindly followed by whatever the authority is saying and without any desire to think for themselves.

It has come to the point where debating any of above Topics is impossible and gets you stamped as "crazy, outlier".

And on a lot of these topics, the messages from government that have been sent were plain wrong, but no corrections have been made, thus the cycle continues.

Where the more 'poor' people around me seem to think more for themselves and with common sense. Those are the people that wonder why the riots in Paris are nowhere to be found in our mainstream media (Netherlands).

I wonder why this is the case and if this is unique to me. One explanation could be that the wealthier group has more to lose when going 'out of favor'. Thoughts?

Re: EU Commission doesn't understand what's written in its own chat control bill

#202

Post by jupp0r »

jll29 wrote: post #50

Don't believe vendors' lies about "end-to-end" encryption. If caught red handed, they will always say it depends on how you define where both "ends" begin. Do not trust a cloud service that you have not developed and deployed yourself. You may trust untrusted hardware with your encrypted content, but only if you have given it your content pre-encrypted by yourself, not trusted a third party to encrypt it on your beha…

You need to think more about your model of trust. You will quickly discover that all security is built on trusting someone, even in the examples you mention above. You can compile your own kernel, but you trust kernel developers to not have put exploits in the source code. You can't audit the source code itself. You also trust your compiler to accurately compile the source code. You also trust compiler developers to not have put exploits into the compiler itself. You also trust the compiler they used to bootstrap their toolchain to compile the compiler.

Fundamentally, all security is based on trusting somebody, understanding their incentives and intentions and weighing risk and reward. An excellent book on the subject is Bruce Schneier's "Liars and Outliers" https://www.schneier.com/books/liars-and-outliers/.

Re: EU Commission doesn't understand what's written in its own chat control bill

#203

Post by pbhjpbhj »

walkhour wrote: post #49

Reminds me of the senator that asked Zuckerberg how do they make money [0], and Zuckerberg simply said they run ads. What a way to use your questioning time, with something that was a google search away. [0] https://youtu.be/n2H8wx1aBiQ

That's a lie by omission, surely. They sell data too. Ads and analytics, game data, user association data, user attention data.

But "ads" is pretty euphemistic -- to the point of dishonesty -- when the ads are targeted political campaign messages, for example.

Cambridge Analytica was at least enabled by Facebook.

I'd say that their operations could be summed up more reasonably by "Facebook track people".

Re: EU Commission doesn't understand what's written in its own chat control bill

#204

Post by anonym29 »

geysersam wrote: post #165
anonym29 wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The upside of this is that it just created a business opportunity for Faraday paint :)

Being the one guy in the neighborhood using faraday paint does not sound suspicious at all. ;)

If it's indoors, would anyone outside even know?

Re: EU Commission doesn't understand what's written in its own chat control bill

#205

Post by pietrushnic »

fsflover wrote: post #82
gizmo wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you trust your bios? Your usb stack? Your network card firmware? I get the desire to control the entire chain, but nowadays you’re surrounded by cameras and microphones 24/7, every smart device is a surveillance sleeper agent waiting for the magic word. Certificate chains are the least of your worries.

> Do you trust your bios? Yes, it's Coreboot with disabled and neutralized Intel ME. > Your usb stack? No, it's isolated in a dedicated, hardware-virtualized VM on Qubes OS. > Your network card firmware? Same as above. And it's FLOSS. > surrounded by cameras and microphones For those, I have hardware kill switches. On the phone, too.

> surrounded by cameras and microphones

I'm using https://github.com/qubesos/qubes-video-companion

Re: EU Commission doesn't understand what's written in its own chat control bill

#206

Post by hilios »

mihaic wrote: post #91
hilios wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EU does public consultations, usually years in advance. If those regulations are affecting your business it might be worthwhile to check their site every once in a while.

Do you know by first-hand experience if these public consultations actually make any difference? I once attended one from the local gov, and everything was already predetermined and the debate was just a dance.

The proposed laws usually change before they are adopted. I can not ascertain how much of an impact the public consultation has. It is online though so the barrier of entry is pretty low. And even if it's completely useless it is still a good way to stay informed if the changes might impact someones business.

Re: EU Commission doesn't understand what's written in its own chat control bill

#207

Post by geysersam »

anonym29 wrote: post #204
geysersam wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being the one guy in the neighborhood using faraday paint does not sound suspicious at all. ;)

If it's indoors, would anyone outside even know?

Yes if they're trying to monitor you.

Re: EU Commission doesn't understand what's written in its own chat control bill

#208

Post by int_19h »

gweinberg wrote: post #85
robopsychology wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK doesn't even have a constitution Also, as a European living in the Bay, part of it is for the higher salaries. If I can take my Bay rate and bring it back to Europe I'm going to do that.

Yes it does. It doesn't have a Constitution, but that's not the same thing as not having a constitution.

UK operates on the notion of parliamentary supremacy, which makes any constitution, formal or informal, largely meaningless, since the Parliament can always override anything in it with simple majority vote:

"It is often said that it would be unconstitutional for the United Kingdom Parliament to do certain things, meaning that the moral, political and other reasons against doing them are so strong that most people would regard it as highly improper if Parliament did these things. But that does not mean that it is beyond the power of Parliament to do such things. If Parliament chose to do any of them, the courts would not hold the Act of Parliament invalid."

Re: EU Commission doesn't understand what's written in its own chat control bill

#209

Post by int_19h »

908B64B197 wrote: post #70
dahwolf wrote: post #65

Software is flexible which seems to result in our human rights being equally flexible. Imagine the police regularly raiding your apartment without announcement. The post office opening all your mail. Storage box companies searching your unit. You wouldn't be OK with that. You're innocent until proven guilty and a search requires a reasonable suspicion of wrongdoing and an approved warrant. Private communication is pr…

Lots of places don't have strong constitutional protections, for anything. Not that long ago, the government in Canada started freezing citizen's bank accounts on suspicions they donated small amounts to a certain peaceful organization organizing protests the government didn't like. They just decided to suspend the constitution (because that's a thing over there?). But what's interesting to see is people from Europe…

Canada has a clause in its Charter of Rights and Freedoms that literally allows the legislature of any province to pass laws in direct contradiction to most of the Charter - specifically, the sections on fundamental rights. They just have to explicitly point out which parts of the Charter they found inconvenient when invoking this clause. Quebec is notorious for abusing this power (mostly for its language laws), but other provinces have also found it useful on occasion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_33_of_the_Canadian_Cha...

Re: EU Commission doesn't understand what's written in its own chat control bill

#210

Post by anonym29 »

geysersam wrote: post #207
anonym29 wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it's indoors, would anyone outside even know?

Yes if they're trying to monitor you.

If your threat model is people who you already know are trying to monitor you, isn't it implied that they think you're suspicious with or without the paint?
Post reply on HN