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

391–400 of 494 posts

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

#391

Post by rnk »

x86x87 wrote: post #320
rnk wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are serving lots of constituents. There's no absolute block across all the people in a state. People have different ideas. I hate all these "spy on you and disable encryption". But it's not like there's a uniform view of how to approach this. Plenty of people respond to "think of the children".

Yes. They are "serving". Especially Cancun Cruz. Seriously, they are not serving anyone.

He's getting his base excited because he's such a reliable putz, seeing the extreme danger from the existence of trans people. Getting votes is how they claim to serve people. I was just referring to the fact that those kinds of people do get votes, they read the room.

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

#392

Post by shkkmo »

u801e wrote: post #385
joebob42 wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't they usually store a hash of it? And doesn't it therefore for the most part work exactly the way you say it ideally should? Of course leaking the hash of my password might make it easier to crack, to some extent, but if they've done a good job then this is much better than it being something the bank can trivially lose.

> Don't they usually store a hash of it? Any bank that restricts which characters one can include in a password probably doesn't store a hash of it.

This is completely false. You validate any password requirements before salting and hashing the password and then store the salt and hash. Even if you restrict usage of previous passwords, you are just comparing hashes.

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

#393

Post by Dalewyn »

dang wrote: post #389
Dalewyn wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Comment in question concerned what the poster personally experienced, which clearly wasn't a pleasant/positive one. If you want to demand he prove he met Feinstein in person, well, that's certainly within your power as moderator and owner of this space. But as far as what he owes to the community, I think he doesn't have to explain anything of his experience interacting with someone. He interacted with Feinstein, his…

Users flagged your comment. I didn't touch it.

Perhaps I've misunderstood what "flagged" means, then. I've always understood that as an indicator for a comment that you or another moderator found objectional, especially since flagged posts usually get hidden from further viewing. Learn something new everyday, as they say.

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

#394

Post by deafpolygon »

Some days, I would like a law that applies to digital things the same thing we already have protected by the constitution; the Fourth Amendment should apply to our digital stores but it doesn't.

> The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

I personally believe "papers, and effects" apply to digital things.

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

#395

Post by Dalewyn »

dang wrote: post #390
Dalewyn wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

None of those are implied. What I posted was bog-standard HN moderation. You could replace the name Feinstein with any other, or her party or politics with any other, and I'd have posted the same moderation response. I'm not sure what you're finding hard to understand about HN having a guideline that asks people not to call names or do flamewar.

I don't have any complications with HN guidelines, but I do with the way they are enforced.

I see plenty of posts that call people, both ordinary and public figures, "names" that go unflagged and unmoderated. I see plenty of meme posts that don't get flagged and moderated. I see political threads and subthreads all the time despite politics strictly being off-limits per guidelines.

In fairness to you, you've never claimed HN is a free speech platform so I am perfectly fine with you publishing submitted threads and comments as you see fit. I'd even die, figuratively speaking, to protect your right to those freedoms of expression and association, and I would hope you will reciprocate the sentiment as a fellow American.

However, the reality is the HN guidelines are not enforced equally, fairly, and objectively, so you will have to excuse me for rolling my eyes at all the inevitable noise that will create (including mine). We can get away with calling Trump, Gates, and Jobs among others names but not Feinstein? Please. I realize HN is short on manpower, but that is not an excuse.

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

#397

Post by triska »

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…

Also, the statement is itself wrong already at face value in many situations, for example if someone has a credit card or runs an online shop and is contractually required to hide something. For instance, quoting from https://usa.visa.com/legal/checkout/terms-of-service.html:

"You are responsible for protecting the confidentiality of your username and password(s), if any. In addition, if you choose to be remembered on your device or browser, or link your use of the Visa Solution with a digital wallet, on one or more device(s), you are responsible for protecting the safety of and access to such device(s). It is important that you do so since we are not responsible for any losses you incur as a result of unauthorized use of your Eligible Card and, depending on the circumstances, your Issuer may hold you responsible for unauthorized use of your Eligible Card account."

Another example for mandatory secrecy are confidentiality requirements imposed by professional obligations, such as for lawyers and physicians, in order to ensure fair trials, and for the protection of human dignity.

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

#398

Post by yakubin »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #60
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…

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.

That’s the second time I see bank account number framed as something private. Why? It doesn’t authorise anyone to do anything. It’s not like a debit/credit card number.

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

#399

Post by glerk »

BLKNSLVR wrote: post #373
BizarroLand wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"IT PROTECTS THE CHILDREN!" they'll scream, while using it to take more power away from society and concentrate it into their own hands. Surveillance isn't some harmless thing, because you can tell a million lies with a drop of the truth in them for any reason you want. Imagine you get established in life and decide to run for local politics only to have the fact that you've gone to Vegas 4 times in your life somehow…

> "IT PROTECTS THE CHILDREN!" they'll scream, while using it to take more power away from society and concentrate it into their own hands. I don't think you're wrong in predicting this, and I actually think you're proven correct by precedent already. The answer to this is many and varied, but one core concept that should always be kept in mind is, much like "with great power comes great responsibility": With great cl…

There is no good answer to this. I suggest not wasting your time trying to argue in good faith with irrational or straight up malicious actors. Better invest in ways to protect yourself, your assets and your anonymity through technology.

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

#400

Post by borski »

Dalewyn wrote: post #393
dang wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Users flagged your comment. I didn't touch it.

Perhaps I've misunderstood what "flagged" means, then. I've always understood that as an indicator for a comment that you or another moderator found objectional, especially since flagged posts usually get hidden from further viewing. Learn something new everyday, as they say.

Flagging is an ability HN users get after attaining a certain level of karma; flagged posts are generally flagged as such by said users, not by the mods.
Post reply on HN