Live data from Hacker News

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

globalencryption.org

161–170 of 240 posts

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

#161
post #96

Contrarian opinion ahead. We live in a very unique period of history - a bubble really - in which governments are not able to intercept certain communications or decrypt certain records, even with the full force of the law behind them. While I recognize and appreciate, on a personal level, the freedom that this provides me, freedom exists only to the extent that there is a government enforcing boundaries on freedom t…

> I'm afraid it's not going to be hard, over the years, to find enough pedophiles and terrorists to make a compellingly popular case for more regulation of encryption.

You're going to oppress the world's entire population of human beings with warrantless global surveillance because of a few "pedophiles and terrorists"? What a tiresome argument, seriously. Go ahead and find us thousands of "pedophiles and terrorists". It won't matter how many you find because what you're proposing as the cure is the tyranny of a government panopticon.

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

#162
post #96

Contrarian opinion ahead. We live in a very unique period of history - a bubble really - in which governments are not able to intercept certain communications or decrypt certain records, even with the full force of the law behind them. While I recognize and appreciate, on a personal level, the freedom that this provides me, freedom exists only to the extent that there is a government enforcing boundaries on freedom t…

The situation where governments can’t (bulk) intercept communications describes basically our entire history, with as small weird exception towards the end. Prior to the invention of the postal service, most communications were verbal and privacy was (relatively) easy to ensure. Even up until very recently, communications interception required some extraordinary action like placing a durable wiretap on a line and listening to verbal communications, or else laboriously steaming open mail. It’s only in the last fifteen years that we moved the bulk of our private, non-business communications onto electronic media that have long-term centralized storage and processing power to scan them. Coincidentally that’s almost as long as encrypted messaging has been popular.

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

#163

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…

I worry that the advent of an entirely mechanized military with robot infantry will be the end of the leaders ever being in a precarious situation

I really don't think that's necessary. So far there has never been a lack of people willing to commit atrocities when ordered to under the right conditions.

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

#164
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…

They don't actually fucking know what they are doing. They get these righteous ideas into their heads and convince themselves they're doing what's good for us. They ignore the consequences even when it affects them, reacting with a literal child-like entitlement and self-importance "you can't read my messages, just the other people's messages, I'm a special class of person, this is outrageous".

There are people here on HN who say they actually met at least one of these politicians. Check out this thread:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35656323

These are the people imposing their silly laws on us. It's a joke. I wanted to respect them enough to think it's all some sort of master plan to oppress us more efficiently but could very well be that they are dumb enough to back this without understanding what encryption even is.

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

#165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But you aren't answering the question, if a program for people in poverty isn't funded by society as a whole, are you having the people in poverty fund it because they're the ones who use it? Your argument seems to break down under examination

I answered the question before it was asked. If you want such a program to exist, you pay for it. If your idea is to make me pay for it, you don’t believe in paying your fair share. Whether or not it is practical to follow my rule to the absolute is a different question. I’m just tired of hearing the fair share people justify not paying their fair share.

There are entire enterprises that operate by this principle. Private Insurance comes to mind first. The problem with insurance and with this philosophy in general is that there are a lot of catestrophic situations you can find yourself in for which you would likely purchase no insurance because you can't ever see yourself being there.

The reason government steps in in cases like loss of job and provision of welfare is because nobody ever expects to be in those situations. But when you end up in those situations, having not bought insurance prior to being there, you will naturally find them pernicious. In order to prevent that from happening, government programs provide a kind of nationwide or statewide insurance policy that you are bought into by default just in case you should happen to need it some day.

You're arguing that you never will, and that might be the case, but that's also strictly speaking a risky proposition if aggregated over the entire population of the US.

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

#166

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…

I agree with you, but nudging can be a good thing if it's meritorious. Lincoln, for instance, had to manipulate people to some extent to achieve his goal of emancipation.

Similarly, I'd say some nudging is in order to tackle the obesity epidemic in the US and other places.

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

#167
So, governments are actively colluding to obstruct Democratic ways of life. They're now in the actively propogandize phase, where they outlaw talking to other people in privacy. Weaponizing tech against the coremost nature of Democracy.

And so are the tech bossess! https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35653867 https://www.thedailybeast.com/elon-musk-tech-bosses-are-lett...

The tech-empires are letting whichever country wants to come in & start dictating terms, step all over people. We no longer even have the spine to call out journalism done in un-Free areas, we've decided Government-sponsored is too risky to even inform people about. https://rsf.org/en/index

With online platforms being cajouled every which way, one would hope the US Government could find some scant resemblance of a soul & do the right thing, which would be to help wage this culture war for a moral & ethical cause, to actually help our Democratic values, instead of psychological assaults on them. The government should be pushing back, demanding more encryption, more privacy, especially more privacy, privacy that even the tech bossess can't access much less the government.

Alas instead of helping fight the good fight, here we see the US-EU is playing the jealous rival, trying to steal some of the same advantages the data-slurping panopticon totalistic information-societies.

We need legal stands from governments to protect & advancing freedom of the press, freedom of speech, freedom of ideas, freedom to think. We ought recognize & attend to open society & other essential liberty.

It's been such a ride. A lot of people are pretty grimdark on what Social Media is & means & the fate of interconnectivity, but my word, how can anyone feel so jaded & old at this point? We are so young, we have explored so few & such narrow options for how we might gather & share & communicate across the internet & it's many sites. I can acknowledge that folks are unhappy, that we are scared of what lies beyond the now tarnishing gilded Creator age, and you're all right, but man, the internet is so phenomenal. This is such an amazing creative ability to create & connect, to explore thought, expands the Rhizomatic / Assembly theory (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assemblage_(philosophy)) view of the world so deeply. There is so much to learn & figure out.

If we can keep this democracy. If we can maintain a vector where we can keep creating new interconnection, new people-figuring-out-what-protocols-people-want-to-use between us. We can combat so much shallowness by owning our speech, by owning our relays, by opting into being our own more selctive amplifiers, picking for ourselves what is signal and what is noise, calling out the short fun & what has real lasting value. Keep making the world more seen, keep sharing & thinking ourselves out loud, in public. And together in private.

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

#168

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.

> supposed privacy advocates will use patriot act arguments to justify violating financial privacy

What are you talking about? I've never seen this. As far as I'm concerned, AML/KYS is just the financial arm of global mass surveillance.

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

#169
post #15
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…

Well, if you were to ask in this very same forum if the trade-offs of private and permissionless communication, as granted by cryptography, should apply to money. You would get a much different answer. So either a large part of HN has already been co-opted by this public campaign, or is uneducated/obtuse, or is able to trace a very different set of weights for what you can do with your expression but not your money.

You won't get a different answer from me at least. KYC/AML is just the financial version of global surveillance and should be fought just as vigorously.

Maybe HN just hates cryptocurrencies.

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

#170
post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Interesting how our leaders see their role not as representing our interests, but in shaping our interests. I mean that's what "leader" means at the end of the day. Of course, though, leader isn't the only way to refer to politicians. In German leader translates literally to Führer ... which isn't really used since the ultimate demise of Herr Schickelgruber. We also use "Repräsentant" whose English counterpart is o…

Historically once people recognize the media is not trustworthy they discount it. You see this in the former USSR countries. People don't take the media seriously like they do in the west.

Lol explain Fox news.
Post reply on HN