Live data from Hacker News

Statement on EU-US Cooperation on Turning Public Opinion Against Encryption

globalencryption.org

51–60 of 240 posts

Re: Statement on EU-US Cooperation on Turning Public Opinion Against Encryption

#51
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Interesting how our leaders see their role not as representing our interests, but in shaping our interests. Someone called it "Manufacturing consent". I think this name describes it pretty good. What these politicians do not seem to underestand is that those law may turn against them at a later point in time.

The term "Manufacturing consent" was coined by Noam Chomsky, American philosopher.

It wasn't. Noam Chomsky readily acknowledges that it was coined by Walter Lippmann in 1922's "Public Opinion".

Re: Statement on EU-US Cooperation on Turning Public Opinion Against Encryption

#52

Interesting how our leaders see their role not as representing our interests, but in shaping our interests. There exists an entire subject in political science dealing with how to increase compliance with the schemes of regulators (see Nudge Theory). The mistake they make is a classic short-run vs. long-run miscalculation. In the short-run, you can get away with these kinds of tactics to increase compliance. For exam…

> There exists an entire subject in political science dealing with how to increase compliance with the schemes of regulators (see Nudge Theory).

It’s a very cynical view of the potential for human government that believes there is no way that the democratic will of the people affects what goals ‘regulators’ pursue.

Consider the possibility perhaps that the point of government is to overcome the prisoner’s dilemma and move people into a better collective equilibrium than they will naturally settle into. Nudges can be a useful tool for creating better outcomes for everyone.

In theory, at least.

Re: Statement on EU-US Cooperation on Turning Public Opinion Against Encryption

#53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Income tax is the problem. I wish governments solely relied on property taxes and user fees for funding, even if they had to increase them a lot to make up for the loss of income tax revenue.

As long as wealth is counted as property. Most people I hear suggesting this expect personal wealth to inhabit a magical class of things that are definitely owned but are somehow not property. edit: i.e. when wealthy people say this, it is usually just a euphemism for lowering their personal tax burden. Wealthy people require more protection (as they are excellent targets) and more scrutiny (because their financial a…

Taxing financial assets has a lot of the same privacy-invading, subjective-enforcement, and loophole problems as taxing income.

However, most corporations own a lot of other assets that are already registered with the government, or pay rent to other corporations that do: real estate, mineral rights, and intellectual property. If we can figure out how to tax these things, that could help.

Re: Statement on EU-US Cooperation on Turning Public Opinion Against Encryption

#54

I've come to the conclusion that Taxes are incompatible with Encryption and Free Speech. If we're ever going to progress as a civilization, something other than ancient and frankly barbaric practice Taxes has to designed and implemented. Every justification for usage or backdoor encryption is eventually rooted in monitoring financial transactions, or preserving the means in which a state can collect them. The "War on…

I'm with Oliver Wendell Holmes (or whoever actually said this) on that one:

"Taxes Are What We Pay for Civilized Society."[0]

[0] https://quoteinvestigator.com/2012/04/13/taxes-civilize/

Re: Statement on EU-US Cooperation on Turning Public Opinion Against Encryption

#55

I have no problem with the police hacking into devices. They have the right to use bugs and find exploits just like they have the right to pick a safe of force a door. But backdoors and unacceptable, that's like mandating that every house have microphones in every room connected to the police center

It’s like having a computer in every car, connected to the internet. And the police asking who was speeding yesterday.

Re: Statement on EU-US Cooperation on Turning Public Opinion Against Encryption

#56

Love how supposed privacy advocates will use patriot act arguments to justify violating financial privacy, then immediately turn around and play the other side when the same talking points are used against any other kinds of privacy.

Did these organizations do that?

Re: Statement on EU-US Cooperation on Turning Public Opinion Against Encryption

#57
post #2

> ...at the EU-US Senior Officials Meeting on Justice and Home Affairs, held in Stockholm on 16 and 17 March, the minutes of which are now available. The delegations “… concurred on the need to mirror privacy by design with lawful access by design…,” apparent code language for mandating the undermining or removal of strong encryption practices. What is wrong with these people? How can anyone, let alone an educated, w…

There is nothing wrong with these people. Those in the power always want to have more power.

There will be no implications if encryption is banned. People have been using unencrypted wired phones and unencrypted bank cards for a long time and the world hasn't collapsed.

Also, there is no need to ban any encryption, client-server encryption protocols like HTTPS can stay, provided that the server would log all session keys for future lawful access.

Re: Statement on EU-US Cooperation on Turning Public Opinion Against Encryption

#58

I've come to the conclusion that Taxes are incompatible with Encryption and Free Speech. If we're ever going to progress as a civilization, something other than ancient and frankly barbaric practice Taxes has to designed and implemented. Every justification for usage or backdoor encryption is eventually rooted in monitoring financial transactions, or preserving the means in which a state can collect them. The "War on…

Income tax is the problem. I wish governments solely relied on property taxes and user fees for funding, even if they had to increase them a lot to make up for the loss of income tax revenue.

A major argument for income tax is that it's naturally countercyclical, which means that governments tax more when incomes are high and less when they are low. The 'progressive' — concave upwards — income tax is even more so. Per Keynesian theory, countercyclical fiscal policy acts to stabilize the economy, and the US has been more stable since the tax base shifted from property tax and tariffs towards income taxes. Tariffs, in particular, can be disastrously procyclical — a failure of a domestic manufacturer may lead to a decline in economic performance and an uptick in imports, which is then exacerbating. It might be possible for a land tax or property tax to be countercyclical, but this would likely depend on the centralized adjustment of valuations, since there is not so far any automatic technique for valuing real property other than immediately after a sale. History has taught us to be cautious about centralized economic micromanagement.

The temporal effects of income tax are often lost in colloquial debates among non-economists who have the impression that they exist primarily for moral reasons — however, the wealthy, in practice, are very good at avoiding them.

Re: Statement on EU-US Cooperation on Turning Public Opinion Against Encryption

#59

I've come to the conclusion that Taxes are incompatible with Encryption and Free Speech. If we're ever going to progress as a civilization, something other than ancient and frankly barbaric practice Taxes has to designed and implemented. Every justification for usage or backdoor encryption is eventually rooted in monitoring financial transactions, or preserving the means in which a state can collect them. The "War on…

Income tax is the problem. I wish governments solely relied on property taxes and user fees for funding, even if they had to increase them a lot to make up for the loss of income tax revenue.

Agree that income tax is a problem, but do not agree with your solution using property tax.

I believe consumption tax is a better approach, in my opinion.

Consumption tax is immediate, indiscriminate at the time we spend the money, while property tax tends to be applied at various times throughout the life of the property.

Re: Statement on EU-US Cooperation on Turning Public Opinion Against Encryption

#60
post #9
post #2

> ...at the EU-US Senior Officials Meeting on Justice and Home Affairs, held in Stockholm on 16 and 17 March, the minutes of which are now available. The delegations “… concurred on the need to mirror privacy by design with lawful access by design…,” apparent code language for mandating the undermining or removal of strong encryption practices. What is wrong with these people? How can anyone, let alone an educated, w…

Power I guess, only because they can. But if you communicate by Cell Phone (txt, email...), encryption can be stopped by law only because they are closed systems. But I tend to believe Cell Phones already come with a backdoor, so laws do not really matter for those. If using gpg via email on an Open System (Linux, BSDs), good luck stopping that.

There is no need to ban encryption in client-server protocols like HTTPS. Just require that servers logs all session keys for future lawful access.
Post reply on HN