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

UK pulls back from clash with Big Tech over private messaging

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 320 posts

Re: UK pulls back from clash with Big Tech over private messaging

#311

Post by nlitened »

fisian wrote: post #246
nlitened wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What they would use instead? Plain-text emails? Plain-text SMS? Paper mail?

France has their own version of Matrix https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/collection/open-source-observato...

The article you've linked says it didn't go far (buggy, vulnerable, difficult to use, test deployment in 2020). Also, Google Play store's reviews say the same.

It's only natural that when a public servant want to make sure their message actually reaches the recipient, they would rather use a solution that 100% works. That's not malice, it's common sense.

Re: UK pulls back from clash with Big Tech over private messaging

#312

Post by nlitened »

thefurdrake wrote: post #295
nlitened wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What they would use instead? Plain-text emails? Plain-text SMS? Paper mail?

This question confuses me. Are we really in a year where people don't know you can securely encrypt email within an organization? This is a solved problem, and it's been solved for decades. It's confusing because you nailed "Plain-text emails" but completely ignored signed, encrypted emails for some reason.

I think the question is not whether it's possible to set up in theory.

The question is whether it's possible to actually deploy and maintain the solution in reality to millions of concurrent users in hundreds thousands of disjoint organizations in thousands of municipalities all over the country. It would require a constant supply (due to organizational churn) of highly qualified tech people who'd willing to be working years for low-five-figures salary in a rigid ineffective governmental structure, surrounded only by non-tech-savvy people. These tech people should also be saints so that they don't embezzle half the budgets while trying to set things up. Also the top visionary who'd push for this multi-year project should not be subject to election cycles.

I honestly think that this level of concentration of long-term effort might be impossible in a country with more than 10 million people or so.

Re: UK pulls back from clash with Big Tech over private messaging

#313

Post by DubiousPusher »

midoridensha wrote: post #258
lapetitejort wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Take a step back from communicating secrets. It should be a fundamental human right to perform math. That's what they're trying to ban. Some equations are apparently too powerful to be performed by lowly humans.

>It should be a fundamental human right to perform math. Why? What if society could be destroyed by performing math? Should it still be a fundamental right? What if the entire universe could be destroyed by doing math? This reminds me of a couple episodes of The Twilight Zone and The Outer Limits. In one ("Need to Know"), there's some secret; when person A tells person B the secret, person B goes insane (and then tri…

You are interpreting reality through a television show...

Re: UK pulls back from clash with Big Tech over private messaging

#314

Post by abwizz »

stephen_g wrote: post #276
Arathorn wrote: post #273

This article is completely wrong , and almost sabotages the fight against the UK Online Safety Bill, given it claims a victory that simply doesn't exist, and so lures everyone into a false sense of complacency. The UK govt must be ecstatic that they have changed nothing and yet the tech industry seems to believe that they've won something. All the govt said was "we'll only force scanning when it's "technically feasib…

Basically all of the secure messaging platforms have indicated that they will pull out of the UK rather than weaken the security model, if or when they are instructed to. That hasn’t changed either. What this may be politically is a way of the Government saying they won’t actually do it, while pretending that nothing has changed to make it look like it’s not a U-turn and pretending they’re not backing down. Hence the…

> As long as the messaging platforms don’t change their commitment

what could possibly go wrong

Re: UK pulls back from clash with Big Tech over private messaging

#315

Post by froggit »

monksy wrote: post #300
ThePowerOfFuet wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

heatinitiative.org was registered 2023-08-23... so the paint is barely dry. Their privacy policy also turns up nothing.

The place has a CEO, made communication to Tim cook, been featured in Wired, put up massive scare mongering examples of bad people, made vague claims of a large organization. (collective effort of concerned child safety experts and advocates) [Prior instance of their page claims researchers, experts, and advocates]. All this and they're solely focused on a small corner case of 1 business and somehow their google pres…

This whole thing with the heat initiative is straight up bizarre. Their entire dialog is just so over the top.

I'll briefly summarize the back and forth heat had with apple, condensing it makes the weirdness really shine through:

Heat Initiative: "Listen up! We DEMAND that the private data of iCloud users be made accessible for CSAM scans. You are to remove it all. The guilty must be punished." Apple: "woah, slow down. We already decided against policing iCloud like that, it'd get way too Orwellian way too fast. We can use on-device Communication Safety systems to make our environment safer while respecting privacy. With features such as detection of potential nudity, we can start cutting off CSAM images and video at the source and work to prevent abuse in the first place." Heat Initiative: "apple, you make stupid money off anything you touch, you employ geniuses, you have responsibility to design a safe, privacy-forward environment that allows for the detection of known child sexual abuse images and video. Also, we really, really demand scanning iCloud." Apple: "did you just ignore what I just said or is there some deeper issue like not knowing words good. this obsession you have with scanning iCloud makes me suspect you have ulterior motives. Heat Initiative: "It's not that I ignored you, I just don't really care about this shit and can't keep up this farce. Either you let the government access iCloud or we'll say you're running 'instagram for kiddy rapists.' we will destroy you." Apple: "yeah, this conversation is over."

Something like that.

Re: UK pulls back from clash with Big Tech over private messaging

#316

Post by DanBC »

giobox wrote: post #304
rollcat wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that if you hold a position in the government, all of your communication (including private email, chats, etc) should be subject to public scrutiny. A government official should be defined not as someone who is holding power, but as an elected representative of the people.

All that would happen much of the time is that people stop writing anything of consequence down, or seek secret channels like the WhatsApp example. NHS employees in the UK as another example admit privately all the time to not recording things in meetings to avoid FoI exposure. I agree with you in principle, but you are fighting human nature in practice - generally no one wants to look bad in public. I think FoI legi…

> NHS employees in the UK as another example admit privately all the time to not recording things in meetings to avoid FoI exposure.

Do you have any examples please?

Re: UK pulls back from clash with Big Tech over private messaging

#317

Post by midoridensha »

DubiousPusher wrote: post #313
midoridensha wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It should be a fundamental human right to perform math. Why? What if society could be destroyed by performing math? Should it still be a fundamental right? What if the entire universe could be destroyed by doing math? This reminds me of a couple episodes of The Twilight Zone and The Outer Limits. In one ("Need to Know"), there's some secret; when person A tells person B the secret, person B goes insane (and then tri…

You are interpreting reality through a television show...

You haven't answered the question about why you think doing math should be a fundamental right.

Re: UK pulls back from clash with Big Tech over private messaging

#318

Post by creativenolo »

simonjgreen wrote: post #309
creativenolo wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you read it regularly? It is centre aligned but as a reader, I wouldn’t say it was Conservative aligned. It certainly is a mile off its alignment with the “Tory press” that typically set the new agenda.

Yes, I am a regular reader. And I didn't say Conservative with a capital C, I said conservative centre. As in, centre with a conservative angle.

Ok, that makes sense but wasn’t obvious.

The Conservative Party, and parties on the far right parties across the world, have left conservatism behind. Something the the left and centre parties are having to take up.

Re: UK pulls back from clash with Big Tech over private messaging

#319

Post by developer93 »

midasuni wrote: post #152
developer93 wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He knew he would get reelected though, it was more about publicity for the cause than principal.

Oh no someone championing civil liberties You don’t get many MPs doing that - especially Tory ones.

I actually went down to campaign for him a few days ;-) I'm just pointing that out in the interests of having the full picture

Re: UK pulls back from clash with Big Tech over private messaging

#320

Post by developer93 »

colinsane wrote: post #135
developer93 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I question how much terror stopping traffic generates, generally more just irritation.

pretty sure “eco terrorism” includes things like sabotaging pipelines and such too. though to your point, that form’s more of an economic weapon than it is terror.

And I that was kind of extinction rebellion's whole point: money talks, let's hit the money, and sure enough the gained attention. However, if economic crimes were equivalent to terrorism there'd be a lot more fraudsters in high security prisons.
Post reply on HN