If so, then every member of parliament, senator, judge, minister and other public officers should upload all their data and conversations for the public to see and regularly update it. After all it's for the "good of the society" right?
The EARN IT bill is back, seeking to scan our messages and photos
171–180 of 494 posts
Re: The EARN IT bill is back, seeking to scan our messages and photos
#172I'm so tired. I wish we didn't have to keep going through constant attacks on our privacy. I know they're hoping that people will give up after a point out of weariness, and I'm afraid when it comes to many people they're right.
I just keep wondering what the hell is wrong with the people who think junk like this is a good idea. And why there are any. Theory: They're child-molesters themselves?
Re: The EARN IT bill is back, seeking to scan our messages and photos
#173Earlier quoted context omitted.
She has been on medical leave since February, which makes me wonder in what capacity she co-sponsored this bill... can she do that from her nursing home?
Having interned long long ago, most "co-authorships/sponsorships" are merely tokens added to a bill to make it seem more impressive. Rarely, if ever, does a bill sponsor have much to do with the bill. At least in my experience. It was a game to see who we could round up for the bill, and then a political game about who would look better or bring a stronger base.
Right, I didn't have any expectation that she personally drafted the text of section 4 or debated the finer details prior to its introduction, or sought out expert testimony, or even read all 53 pages, or anything like that.
I was more curious over whether the "rounding up" and adding her to the list involved her being present or questioned in any capacity, or whether she just had a standing guideline that she wanted to be listed as a co-sponsor on any Judiciary Committee bills also sponsored by Durbin and Graham or something like that.
Re: The EARN IT bill is back, seeking to scan our messages and photos
#174Earlier quoted context omitted.
I honestly think it’s mostly that voters simply don’t know. She’s a democrat, but runs against democrats (usually), and wins largely because she’s been there forever and, tbh, California is a pretty spectacular place to live. Thus, as CA is pretty great in general, Feinstein “can’t be that bad,” so why mess up a fine thing. (Keep your “CA sucks” comments out of here please; your perception doesn’t matter in this case…
> Thus, as CA is pretty great in general, Feinstein “can’t be that bad,” so why mess up a fine thing. A senator represents the state's views within the federal government, and has next to nothing to do with internal policies within the state. Electing Feinstein or some other person has effectively little-to-no impact on a California citizens daily life. > (Keep your “CA sucks” comments out of here please; your percep…
I agree with everything you said, but you missed my point somewhat.
You and I know that a senator is not an in-state representative, and that their work is federal in nature. Most people who vote do not know that, and do not understand the distinction between state reps and federal reps. If you took a poll, how many people do you think would even know CA had a state senate and separate federal senators? I would surmise very few.
As to the point about CA; I agree, gripe away if you’d like, and I agree CA has many issues it needs to address. So does literally every state; my point was to not go down that rabbit hole, and instead realize that most Californians like it here. They enjoy the weather, infrastructure generally works, etc. As a result, most vote for the status quo. I’m not saying that’s a good thing.
Re: The EARN IT bill is back, seeking to scan our messages and photos
#175Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because she's not a Republican, and competitive primaries for long-time incumbents are often political suicide for the challenger. Voters have a poor set of choices and select the least bad.
California uses "jungle primaries" where the top two vote getters regardless of party advance to the general election. You can't blame the two-party system here, voters could easily choose another Democrat if that's what they wanted.
I do wish people would read to the end of the sentence (which addressed that issue) before reacting.
Re: The EARN IT bill is back, seeking to scan our messages and photos
#176Unless and until the security state and neocon/neolib corporatist* power complex is ripped out of our government this will never stop and the People will lose this war. It's much harder to rescind a law than pass it, which means they only have to win once and we have to win every time. We are doomed by this asymmetry.
I found the comments under the TikTok ban thread the other day and asked,
Why are you so concerned about China, which can do nothing, while other apps collect the data in the country you are in has the actual power to jail you because, you support abortion or LGBTQ.
The mental gymnastics were, US has a due process of law and China is an authoritarian dictatorship, while they still live in the US and China can't extradite them.
People constantly fail to realize, the views change, what's legal today could be illegal tomorrow, and you will absolutely be profiled as a risk.
Even if they can't prove you are guilty, the absolute nightmare of going through the due process of law and being tagged as a risk is something to think about and take it seriously. The concern must not be if the app is based on what country, it must be why does this app want to know so much about me, or why does the govt need to know my every opinion.
US trusted Dick Cheney's words and we all know what happened.
Re: The EARN IT bill is back, seeking to scan our messages and photos
#177Earlier 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.
[deleted]
Re: The EARN IT bill is back, seeking to scan our messages and photos
#178As I've said before, complaining about privacy will only take you so far because the issues are too abstract for many people. While right-wing attacks on abortion and contraception may seem irrelevant to tech issues, they also attack the legal basis for privacy, which is not explicitly written into the US constitution. It'd be wise to focus a little less on individual bills and a little more on the broader strategic…
By accepting their framing of "CSAM vs personal privacy" as the moral conundrum, you have already lost. You will be forced to compromise over and over, trading a little liberty for a little security, "for the children." As if the "intelligence community" that ran Jeffrey Epstein is going to use their shiny new surveillance powers to eradicate pedophilia.
That's wrong. CSAM is a problem, the tech industry has failed to get to grips with how easily it facilitates CSAM sharing (not dissimilar to piracy, though I support the latter), and until the tech industry can point to a credible CSAM mitigation policy proposal it will keep looping back to the CSAM-v-privacy framing.
Skip the rhetorical flourishes and come up with a proposal that addresses the issue. If you refuse to do so, then you can't complain about privacy-eradicating opponents offering their mediocre or bad policies. Refusing to acknowledge an issue exists is an automatic loser.
Re: The EARN IT bill is back, seeking to scan our messages and photos
#179Earlier quoted context omitted.
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
Not GP, but security refers to the protection of the system, while privacy refers to the protection of information.
So you need to protect the system to protect the information on it, but there are also sometimes trade offs between security and privacy when you offload some system protection by giving away some information to another party. For example SmartScreen with Microsoft, and Safe Browsing with Google Chrome.
Re: The EARN IT bill is back, seeking to scan our messages and photos
#180this has been done before: https://www.history.com/topics/colonial-america/salem-witch-...
That's a scarily good comparison. Children need to be protected, but it feels like there is a steady erosion of basic rights to privacy, free speech, free expression, and free choice that are being justified with "whatever it takes to save a child".