Live data from Hacker News

Encrypting private data and private communications is now an ethical duty

blog.tripu.info

121–130 of 240 posts

Re: Encrypting private data and private communications is now an ethical duty

#121

The easiest way to combat "you have nothing to hide" is if you were in a country taken over by dictators or terrorists, those leaders don't care and cannot be reasoned with. They will use the backdoor at any time to punish dissent or any misalignment with their rules. And if people say, "but our country is free", tell them that if your country was not, how would you get back to freedom? Is your software and hardware…

This feels a bit redundant. If you were in a country taken over by dictators or terrorists, those dictators or terrorists won't hesitate to deploy a mandatory surveillance regime (see: Xinjiang), they don't need a leg up from the previous democratic government. If your country is not overtaken by dictators or terrorists, the "nothing to hide" argument stands.

This hypothetical situation is not made materially worse by the existing backdoor.

Re: Encrypting private data and private communications is now an ethical duty

#122
>Some of its member states, like Hungary and Poland, are still immature barely-liberal regimes with more than a whiff of political repression (“flawed democracies”).

Seriously? You must be reading the media that push the narrative a country is democratic if allies of EPP(the largest EU party) win the elections there consistently otherwise it is a horrible autocracy. Imagine people actually voting for who they want for and these people than rule, without asking Brussels for permission! What audacity! They even had the audacity to veto ACTA (remember that)!

It is extremely funny the ruling party that is called "undemocratic" after ruling for 8 years in Poland has now(last Sunday) essentially lost power in democratic elections with the highest voter turnover ever. If this is what happens in a "flawed democracy" I'd not want to live in an "unflawed one".

Also, you seem to be against the overtly autocratic laws proposed by the EU commission like this monitoring law. Perhaps you don't know the party that just has won the election in Poland (the so called "democratic opposition", why democratic? Because democracy is only when they win of course.) is led by Donald Tusk, who was the leader of the previous EU council and is/was the deputy of EPP, the biggest party in Europe (guys that want to pass the law you're so much against).

So where did these "undemocratic" claims come from? In Hungary allegedly there are some curbs on freedom of speech etc. But in Poland? No, the biggest proof is that there are plenty of opposing media (that's why the opposition won).

So why?

Well. The EPP-aligned Po party in Poland when they miserably failed the elections in 2015 immediately started claiming the now ruling party is "undemocratic" (*both parties actually broke the constitution regarding the highest court so there was a typical "pot calling kettle black" situation - that wasn't even the biggest argument, the biggest argument was that they were "power hungry" by rightfully and legally taking power in a country where the majority voted for them by electing their own officials into various state enterprises etc - stuff every single party did before and will do after).

Time has passed, the ruling party has made stupid mistakes, they pissed lots of people by being too religious and pushing their worldview on everyone including myself(for example the high court members elected by them made a ruling you can't abort a pregnancy just because the foetus has a deadly disease, it has always been legal to abort if the mother is in danger) on everyone, but what they also did is they actually fulfilled a number of promises they made prior to the elections. Perhaps that is normal where you live, but it Poland it wasn't. It was normal not just to completely forget all your promises, but to pass laws directly opposing them. They were the only party that actually did what they said they will, also they found and stopped corruption and vat fraud that amounted to 50% more money in the budget during their rule, huge number of roads, motorways etc were built. Also they (called "far right in the west, funny again" increased child benefits essentially getting rid of child poverty). So they won the next election. They continued doing what they did before, but then covid happened and they made stupid mistakes, they were suspicions of corruption on buying respirators etc. Then Russia and Belarus started picking up tens of thousands of people from middle east and africa, flying them to Belarus (for between $5k and $50k per head depending on "class of travel") and forcing these people to attack the polish border in hope Poland will take them in, they will cause mayhem like everywhere else in Europe unconstrained illegal immigration happened turning Poles anti-immigration (guess why, they were hoping well close the borders on Ukrainians). These were people from mild climate countries being dropped in a middle of a forested area with bogs, rivers etc in winter. They were told if they want to get to Germany they have to attack Polish border guards and they did and still do. Why don't they just ask for asylum in Poland, asking the first border guard they meet? Because they want to go to Germany and asking for asylum in Poland means they would be sent back to Poland by the Germans. Until now Polish border guards have saved over 200 people that were stuck in swamps, or having hypothermia etc. They got free heathcare in Polish hospitals. How many if them claimed asylum in Poland? Less than 50. What happened to the rest? They preferred to be dropped of on Belarusian side of the border hoping to try again to cross illegally later.

In this environment the opposition started making baseless claims about "the forest service building mass graves pits" and other bullshit(despite there being lots of humanitarian organisations there illegally), the government instead said they'll build a 180km border wall in 6 months. The opposition said it will never happen, then the wall was built.

Then the war in Ukraine started and specially in the beginning they handled it very well too. Not only Ukrainians were given the same heathcare and rights to work and run businesses like Polish people, but they got the same benefits. Every single government service in Poland has been translated into Ukrainian. 250k Ukrainian kids went to Polish schools. Poland led by that party was the first country to send 200 tanks to Ukraine, anti helicopter rockets, electricity via a new 500kV interconnector and the government did everything in its power to shame pro-Russian countries like Germany and France to help until they did start helping.

Then the inflation happened, still thanks to good economic policy Poland survived it with one of smallest unemployment rates in Europe. Now the inflation is dropping and people forget about such things when times are better.

However, this "undemocratic" ruling party that won the elections twice (not in a landslide - 90% Erdoğan's Turkey style, but in difficult coalitions both times) seemed to became tiered. The campaign focused only on how Tusk was a horrible corrupt prime minister before, that he was openly Pro Putin's Russia until it wasn't possible anymore and that his first party was funded illegally by German CDU (it is illegal for foreign organisations to fund parties). Younger people didn't remember his rule and the crapoy campaign from the "undemocratic" ruling party in connection with that it is unlikely to win for the third time meant they lost. They, as a single party, got the most votes, but the "democratic" opposition has more votes together so they basically lost.

As for the stupid claims of spying on "opposition and some journalists" the only proof is that pegasus was found on their phones and one of these people was being investigated at the time (in connection with illegal party funding). How do you know it was Polish police that used Pegasus and not Russia, Israel or any number of other countries? And if they did, what proof is there for it being done illegally? If it happened it required court order and if it did well know everything about it now that the "undemocratic" government lost power in democratic elections.

Re: Encrypting private data and private communications is now an ethical duty

#123

> you would be morally obliged to disobey In days of yore my CS law module was taught by a QC - that's a high ranking barrister in the UK - who explained the world of difference between the "The Rule of Law" and "the law" in a class called "jurisprudence". Rule of Law (capitalised conceptual) is there as permanent ground truth in contrast to the ephemeral du-jure laws. At times I still struggle with that profound cou…

Of course, the idea that there is any kind of "permanent ground truth" around morals/laws is very much up for debate. Some philosophers think it exists (usually called "natural law" [1]), while many others think it's nonsense. I would guess that most anthropologists, for instance, would say it's rubbish -- people who have studied the exceedingly wide variation in what is considered moral or immoral across cultures. A…

It's permanent in the sense that it doesn't change from one person's trial to another's. Not in that it can't change at all. IMO, the GP didn't explain it very well, I prefer the word "objective" here.

Natural law is a completely different concept.

Re: Encrypting private data and private communications is now an ethical duty

#124
post #109
post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mostly not a lack of will but much more local and urgent priorities than figuring out SSH and PGP, like jobs and chores for example.

As I said in another comment, it's not about everyone installing ssh and pgp and configuring them and learning how to use them, it's about us in the tech community to provide tools so easy to use you don't even know you're using state-of-the-art privacy tools. Like what Signal has done, and now it is expected that any messenger at least positions themselves on the end-to-end-encryption. Or like what Deltachat is doin…

Been there, done that. It's already hard to scale those two apps beyond your immediate circles and people won't just stop using WhatsApp or Viber or whatnot. But then try to convince your friends that they have to convince their friends. Friendships are not a pyramid scheme.

Re: Encrypting private data and private communications is now an ethical duty

#125
"Despotism" ( 1946 PSA )

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TaWSqboZr1w

Hardly a new problem, but certainly a recurring theme in history.

It is hypocrisy and lunacy that take over fundamental respect for individual privacy. It is inescapable in the current global exchange.

Have a gloriously wonderful day =)

Re: Encrypting private data and private communications is now an ethical duty

#126
i'd like to shoutout to this really interesting youtube channel, exurb1a

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fzhkwyoe5vI

^he has a video on this topic, its a rather philosophical channel, and this is a rather philosophical video

ie, legitimate political opposition to the "only the state can see all of your secrets" is actually "let everyone's secrets be out in the open, those of politicians too"

if opposition starts using the logical endpoint of this line of reasoning, perhaps these constant attempts at removing our freedoms might diminish in quantity

Re: Encrypting private data and private communications is now an ethical duty

#128
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not unrealistic then, it's just a lack of will.

Yes, most of these tools are a pain in the ass to use, so people can't be bothered. The only universally used tech on this list is SSL, because end users don't need to "install SSL and learn to use it" - we had to put in the work to upgrade or shitty servers, and they get the benefits. Time had proven that the "don't you care about your privacy" argument doesn't work, so it's up to us to make the privacy-respecting t…

Expect people to install those tools in unrealistic. But companies can implement all the features in the end product (web browser, email client, IM client etc.).

Re: Encrypting private data and private communications is now an ethical duty

#129

> you would be morally obliged to disobey In days of yore my CS law module was taught by a QC - that's a high ranking barrister in the UK - who explained the world of difference between the "The Rule of Law" and "the law" in a class called "jurisprudence". Rule of Law (capitalised conceptual) is there as permanent ground truth in contrast to the ephemeral du-jure laws. At times I still struggle with that profound cou…

Defining Rule of Law as “a permanent ground truth” is likely part of the confusion, as that definition doesn’t really encapsulate the concept.

I find it much easier when it is defined in contrast with “not rule of law” or “arbitrary rule by men” as it is traditionally described.

The point being that it is not about the laws themselves, but rather the manner in which power is exercised. Laws may exist, but if some people are not be bound by them, and are able to wield the laws however they wish (we call these people tyrants), then you don’t truly have rule by law, you are rule by arbitrary will. In order to have rule by law, the law must be the source of power itself, and must apply to all people equally.

This is where resistance to unjust laws or unjust authorities comes in. When people use their authority to put themselves above the law or excised use the law in an unjust/unequal manner, then we are stepping outside the bounds of the rule of law itself. The law is reduced to a mere tool of oppression rather than a source of legitimate authority.

A corollary to this, as mentioned by another commenter, is the concept of so called “natural law”, that is law that exists as an antecedent to human law or is given by god/some other non human source. Note that rule of law is not the same as nor is it dependent on a concept of natural law. The concept of “The Rule of Law” is much older than that of “natural law”.

Re: Encrypting private data and private communications is now an ethical duty

#130

Lots of comments here mention that the vast majority of people won't use PGP, Linux and other things to protect their privacy, because they don't care/are dumb/have more important things to do/whatever. The bottom line though is that people that are more tech savvy and more knowledgeable will always have better privacy no matter what, unless you literally enforce Linux and all that on everyone, which is just not gonn…

It is actually a tragedy that privacy is so inconvenient and complicated
Post reply on HN