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

The EARN IT bill is back, seeking to scan our messages and photos

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 494 posts

Re: The EARN IT bill is back, seeking to scan our messages and photos

#151

Post by pksebben »

JohnFen wrote: post #114
pksebben wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like we just have to hold out for another couple of decades - until there aren't any boomers left in government. This whole clusterfuck is a result of old people not knowing their ass from a pihole.

If history is any guide, the people who will replace the boomers will not be any different. The root cause is not related to age or generation, it's related to power.

You know, you're probably right and that makes me sad. That said, it's easy for the bad apples to spoil the bunch right now because most congress critters don't actually know what encryption is or how it works - I suppose my hope is that at some point, the Evil Ones™ will have a much harder time convincing the Dumb Ones™ that they're trying to 'protect children' with this kinda nonsense.

Of course, then the posts just get kicked down the line to the next new tech that nobody groks, but at least perhaps we can stop fighting this specific one so hard and so frequently.

Re: The EARN IT bill is back, seeking to scan our messages and photos

#152

Post by the88doctor »

Alupis wrote: post #101
pc86 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even among the dinosaurs in the US Senate, Feinstein stands alone in her striking ability to be willfully ignorant about anything developed after the steam locomotive. The country would be an objectively better place if both the House and Senate had a mandatory retirement age.

Why do these people continue to be re-elected at all? Surely there's some other (D) that could have replaced Feinstein a decade ago - but California keeps re-electing her? There's near unanimous agreement she "lost it" long ago - yet here she still is. A mandatory retirement age is great and all... but maybe we need to figure out why people vote for someone nearly nobody wants in the first place. Just the "safe" vote…

I think it's a combination of risk aversion and the cost of acquiring information.

Most people don't do extensive (or any) research before voting. They choose a candidate based on party affiliation or the information on TV. So for that majority of people, they will vote for a candidate whether or not the candidate is of sound mind. They assume other people have done the due diligence.

On the other hand, you have the parties themselves. The Democratic Party would rather have a senile Democrat than a non-senile Republican. And the Democratic Party is itself strongly influenced by other Democrat politicians who may even appreciate a senile coworker since that coworker can be more easily manipulated. So they have no incentive to risk losing that by suggesting or supporting a different Democratic candidate.

That in turn means new Democrat candidates will struggle to get the amount of support or funding which is necessary to publicize oneself enough that the complacent members of the public mentioned earlier could vote for them.

Re: The EARN IT bill is back, seeking to scan our messages and photos

#153

Post by AaronM »

morkalork wrote: post #117
prottog wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the reasoning behind not having an age cap in Congress is that if the people want to elect someone who is old, they should be able to do so. The ultimate check in a democratic society is the people, and like a different commenter said, it's strange that the voters of California continue to vote for Feinstein.

Presumably they vote for her because she is a democrat and the other viable candidate, a republican, is completely unpalatable to them. The problem is internal party politics that appear to have an unwritten rule of re-running the same candidate until they lose.

This, at one point a candidate, and those working for a candidate would be blacklisted by the party if they tried to run against an incumbent.

Re: The EARN IT bill is back, seeking to scan our messages and photos

#154

Post by NickBusey »

jcutrell wrote: post #71
maerF0x0 wrote: post #7

A reminder that "you have nothing to hide" argument is a fallacy because people abuse their power: Some first hits as reminders of places where their powers are abused [1]: "NSA staff used spy tools on spouses, ex-lovers: watchdog" https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-surveillance-watchdog... [2]: https://reason.com/2022/07/26/police-can-access-your-ring-ca... [3]: https://reason.com/2021/04/26/warrantless-border-s…

For people who say they have nothing to hide, I ask them why they have locks on their doors, passwords to their email, and clothes on their body.

I like to ask why they have a door on their bathroom.

Re: The EARN IT bill is back, seeking to scan our messages and photos

#155

Post by ranger_danger »

pksebben wrote: post #87
hammyhavoc wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, clothes are mostly down to weather and laws on public decency, and nudists are the counterpoint that prove some demographics would prefer to be naked if the law allowed it, same with tribes like Koma. Locks are more for security than privacy, and it's important not to conflate the two. People can have nothing to hide, but also not want to be robbed. And as for email, that's again a matter of security because th…

In an information environment, security and privacy are the same thing. The terms may have different connotations culturally, but good security-in-depth is the same set of practices that enable digital privacy, because the objective is the same: prevent leakage of facts.

Another problem that I feel has barely even been touched on in recent time is what even are facts. People see things on the Internet and take it for gospel.

You know information people ALWAYS blindly believe 100%? "Leaked" data. Imagine how much power one could have with manipulated, leaked, data.

Re: The EARN IT bill is back, seeking to scan our messages and photos

#156

Post by lockhouse »

x86x87 wrote: post #95
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People abuse their power, but that wouldn't matter if you really had nothing to hide. But everybody has something to hide. Your social security number? Your bank account number? Your debit card PIN? Yeah, pretty sure you have something to hide.

No. Sorry. This is invalid. It would be pretty bad if we declare some shit illegal and retroactively apply the "law". You will be charged for shit that everyone did and is perfectly fine. For example: How would you like to go to jail for not being a Christian? This will be weaponized. This is what fascism looks like.

It was okay to be a Jew in Germany until it wasn't. I know, Godwin's Law, but valid in this case.

Re: The EARN IT bill is back, seeking to scan our messages and photos

#157

Post by gregw2 »

trackflak wrote: post #17
rahidz wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our privacy. Which billionaire travels to which island while abusing which child, financed by what money, will remain happily hidden away.

There is a Bible verse that says every deed done in darkness shall be named in the light. At times like these, I wish the deity who inspired it was a little more proactive.

At times like these, I'd imagine that deity wishes we were more proactive too... https://www.openbible.info/topics/being_a_light

(Verses the parent poster may be referring to: https://www.openbible.info/topics/all_shall_be_revealed )

Re: The EARN IT bill is back, seeking to scan our messages and photos

#158

Post by ranger_danger »

hammyhavoc wrote: post #93
pksebben wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In an information environment, security and privacy are the same thing. The terms may have different connotations culturally, but good security-in-depth is the same set of practices that enable digital privacy, because the objective is the same: prevent leakage of facts.

You can have E2EE to the service provider, but they can be free to rummage through your data if they choose to or are coerced to by a legal demand from an authority. But it eliminates the average schmoe from going through that data. Is that adequate security? Is that adequate privacy? This is what bills like EARN IT and its ilk are positing with backdoors et al. It depends on your threat model. If a warrant opens a d…

> Are you protecting business data or trying to survive in an oppressive regime?

First it's just one, then it becomes the other.

Re: The EARN IT bill is back, seeking to scan our messages and photos

#159

Post by pksebben »

d4mi3n wrote: post #150
JohnFen wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In an information environment, security and privacy are the same thing Yes. Privacy is a subset of security.

I'd argue that they're overlapping sets of concerns, not necessarily identical to or subsets of each other. Off the cuff: * Being an anonymous person walking through a city. This is a privacy concern and only becomes a security concern if I'm a public persona or some kind of person of interest. * Moving to a new school/city/job and not having your social reputation follow you. This allows a lot of people a chance to…

How would you define the terms? IMO these are all 'security' related, just personal security (which is what I define privacy as).

The most accurate lines I can draw around either are abstract enough that they end up in the same bucket, but perhaps we're defining them differently

Re: The EARN IT bill is back, seeking to scan our messages and photos

#160

Post by hammyhavoc »

ranger_danger wrote: post #155
pksebben wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In an information environment, security and privacy are the same thing. The terms may have different connotations culturally, but good security-in-depth is the same set of practices that enable digital privacy, because the objective is the same: prevent leakage of facts.

Another problem that I feel has barely even been touched on in recent time is what even are facts. People see things on the Internet and take it for gospel. You know information people ALWAYS blindly believe 100%? "Leaked" data. Imagine how much power one could have with manipulated , leaked, data.

This is what I said about WikiLeaks even at the time. Sprinkle in some untruths with truths and you've got something convincing.
Post reply on HN