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

U.K. demand for a back door to Apple data threatens Americans, lawmakers say

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 331 posts

Re: U.K. demand for a back door to Apple data threatens Americans, lawmakers say

#301

Post by nickburns »

kdmtctl wrote: post #266
sneak wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

iMessage e2ee is bullshit because iCloud Backup e2ee is opt-in, and approximately 0% of Apple’s user base has turned it on, making iCloud Backup non-e2ee in practice. All of the iMessage access data (either the iMessages themselves or the iMessage sync key for “Messages in iCloud”) is stored in the non-e2ee iCloud Backup. This means that the iMessage service e2ee is meaningless because the iMessages themselves are no…

Sorry. Didn't get it. So, if iMessages IS e2ee (supposedly) and someone properly makes iCloud backups e2ee (supposedly), how the Feds will break it? I do understand the counterpart party problem, it is not someone can control. Sent once, it's free to be seen by anyone.

Nobody has suggested that anyone, Feds included, has the present technical capability to break any of the security levels that are in widescale E2EE usage today.

Re: U.K. demand for a back door to Apple data threatens Americans, lawmakers say

#302

Post by hnlmorg »

kennysoona wrote: post #276
hnlmorg wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You say that but I’ve shared several examples of the same things happening in other countries like America too. So I don’t think the UK is any further along in that regard. There are other areas where the UK is further along though. Such as CCTV surveillance in London. There are also areas where the UK is far less Orwellian, for example our open-mindedness about abortion and gender identity. The UK’s legal system isn…

> You say that but I’ve shared several examples of the same things happening in other countries like America too. You've shown some protestors getting arrested, but I don't believe you can show any equivalent of cops acting as thought police for tweets. > for example our open-mindedness about abortion and gender identity. Funny you say that, because there isn't so much open-mindedness as a forced viewpoint. I'm trans…

> You've shown some protestors getting arrested, but I don't believe you can show any equivalent of cops acting as thought police for tweets

I have elsewhere.

> Funny you say that, because there isn't so much open-mindedness as a forced viewpoint. I'm trans, FWIW, but I don't at all agree with sending cops to peoples houses because a ciswoman has doubts about accepting a transwoman completely as a woman.

I wouldn’t say it’s a forced viewpoint here either.

Quite the opposite in fact, there’s a lot of really vocal people in the UK who publicly denounce transgender people.

Re: U.K. demand for a back door to Apple data threatens Americans, lawmakers say

#303

Post by hnlmorg »

impossiblefork wrote: post #229
foldr wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing actually happened to the guy with the blank sheet of paper (or at least, if it did, that’s not reported in the article). Certainly you can find examples of the British police overpolicing protests, and that’s something that people rightly get angry about. It’s just that there’s a huge distance between that kind of thing (which happens pretty much everywhere from time to time - do US police forces have an exem…

Perhaps, but I am not comparing it to American forces. I'm Swedish and while I have some things to do with America, mostly indirectly, it's not my centre of reference.

Sweden’s got its own fair share of problems at the moment too.

Arguments around citizenship. Problems with gun violence (which the UK and most of countries solved decades ago).

It’s not like you couldn’t draw a Mad Max parallel just by looking at the headlines in Swedish news.

Re: U.K. demand for a back door to Apple data threatens Americans, lawmakers say

#304

Post by hnlmorg »

kennysoona wrote: post #298
foldr wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if you don't want to have an evidence-based discussion with me, I hope that you will check more carefully before making sweeping claims about the UK on HN in future.

I'm confident in the claims I've made, not feeling like it's worth the work to convince you personally is quite a different thing.

Not being funny, but you’re the one being closed minded here.

The other commenter has cited evidence that’s backed up their claims and you’re consistently responding with rhetoric.

This is a constant theme when people argue about freedom of speech being worse in the UK. They cherry pick a couple of headlines from hugely unreliable sources like Twitter (the land of vocal twits) and the Daily Mail (which most people here have nicknamed The Daily Fail because it’s so often wrong) and overlook what’s actually happening in their own countries too.

But if it makes you feel better that your own country isn’t also going to hell in a hand-basket because you’re too busy doomscrolling the UK news, then keep at it. ;)

Re: U.K. demand for a back door to Apple data threatens Americans, lawmakers say

#305

Post by kennysoona »

hnlmorg wrote: post #302
kennysoona wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You say that but I’ve shared several examples of the same things happening in other countries like America too. You've shown some protestors getting arrested, but I don't believe you can show any equivalent of cops acting as thought police for tweets. > for example our open-mindedness about abortion and gender identity. Funny you say that, because there isn't so much open-mindedness as a forced viewpoint. I'm trans…

> You've shown some protestors getting arrested, but I don't believe you can show any equivalent of cops acting as thought police for tweets I have elsewhere. > Funny you say that, because there isn't so much open-mindedness as a forced viewpoint. I'm trans, FWIW, but I don't at all agree with sending cops to peoples houses because a ciswoman has doubts about accepting a transwoman completely as a woman. I wouldn’t s…

> I have elsewhere.

Could you relink them? I don't see anything, and I don't think you could show it is to the same extent as in the UK.

> I wouldn’t say it’s a forced viewpoint here either.

Then why do cops keep showing up for wrongthink?

Re: U.K. demand for a back door to Apple data threatens Americans, lawmakers say

#306

Post by adammarples »

randunel wrote: post #172

Limit it to UK persons of interest and the Americans will be ok with it, see https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Account_Tax_Complian...

You can't limit an OS level encryption backdoor at the point of manufacture to some intended target later down the line. This allows mass surveillance on everybody's private files. Stop posting that stupid link on every thread it has nothing to do with this.

Re: U.K. demand for a back door to Apple data threatens Americans, lawmakers say

#307

Post by kennysoona »

hnlmorg wrote: post #304
kennysoona wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm confident in the claims I've made, not feeling like it's worth the work to convince you personally is quite a different thing.

Not being funny, but you’re the one being closed minded here. The other commenter has cited evidence that’s backed up their claims and you’re consistently responding with rhetoric. This is a constant theme when people argue about freedom of speech being worse in the UK. They cherry pick a couple of headlines from hugely unreliable sources like Twitter (the land of vocal twits) and the Daily Mail (which most people he…

> The other commenter has cited evidence that’s backed up their claims and you’re consistently responding with rhetoric.

Not the way I see it.

I'm not willing to cite every single instance of a trend so a commenter can pick apart each one to try and dismiss it, when the problem is the trend itself, and not specific instances.

That user also wants to try and pretend that the issue magically stopped after the local police were apparently counseled on the matter, and yet, hark!- another instance less than 4 months old![0]

> This is a constant theme when people argue about freedom of speech being worse in the UK.

I think the bigger issue is tribalism and feeling the need to defend country (and thus tribe) instead of acknowledging hey, maybe there really is a problem?

> They cherry pick a couple of headlines from hugely unreliable sources like Twitter (the land of vocal twits) and the Daily Mail (which most people here have nicknamed The Daily Fail because it’s so often wrong) and

I'm well aware of the reliability of the DM, but when they are just posting basically an interview with someone, it's sufficient as a source. Unless you want to dispute anything factual in the DM article that was linked?

> overlook what’s actually happening in their own countries too.

I think this is mostly a whataboutism.

> But if it makes you feel better that your own country isn’t also going to hell in a hand-basket because you’re too busy doomscrolling the UK news, then keep at it. ;)

I'm deeply concerned with what is happening in many countries, but that doesn't mean I can't be more concerned and critical of a country that is doing more wrong in some contexts than others.

[0]https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/11/16/tweets-free-spee...

Re: U.K. demand for a back door to Apple data threatens Americans, lawmakers say

#308

Post by kennysoona »

hnlmorg wrote: post #188
inejge wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Several examples, including blank piece of paper: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-62883713

That’s not really the same as what’s being discussed though it’s still troubling. Thankfully common sense prevailed and those people weren’t convicted. meanwhile in other “less Orwellian” counties people are getting charged for similar actions: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/protester-int... Where’s your freedom of speech there? I’m not saying I agree with Met. But I also don’t agree it proves the UK…

> Thankfully common sense prevailed and those people weren’t convicted. meanwhile in other “less Orwellian” counties people are getting charged for similar actions:

> https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/protester-int...

Jumping over a barricade and disrupting a speech doesn't seem remotely comparable to holding up a blank piece of paper.

Re: U.K. demand for a back door to Apple data threatens Americans, lawmakers say

#309

Post by foldr »

kennysoona wrote: post #307
hnlmorg wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not being funny, but you’re the one being closed minded here. The other commenter has cited evidence that’s backed up their claims and you’re consistently responding with rhetoric. This is a constant theme when people argue about freedom of speech being worse in the UK. They cherry pick a couple of headlines from hugely unreliable sources like Twitter (the land of vocal twits) and the Daily Mail (which most people he…

> The other commenter has cited evidence that’s backed up their claims and you’re consistently responding with rhetoric. Not the way I see it. I'm not willing to cite every single instance of a trend so a commenter can pick apart each one to try and dismiss it, when the problem is the trend itself, and not specific instances. That user also wants to try and pretend that the issue magically stopped after the local pol…

That’s a 2024 article about an incident that happened in 2019. You can see the date mentioned in this non-paywalled write up: https://freespeechunion.org/i-too-had-visit-from-police-over...

This is why it’s important to show sources so that (understandable) mistakes like this can be pointed out. If you keep posting sources that have been misinterpreted or that lack important context (which again is understandable - I don’t expect people outside the UK to obsessively follow UK news) then we can’t really take your word for it that you’ve Googled and found lots of better examples.

Re: U.K. demand for a back door to Apple data threatens Americans, lawmakers say

#310

Post by kennysoona »

foldr wrote: post #309
kennysoona wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The other commenter has cited evidence that’s backed up their claims and you’re consistently responding with rhetoric. Not the way I see it. I'm not willing to cite every single instance of a trend so a commenter can pick apart each one to try and dismiss it, when the problem is the trend itself, and not specific instances. That user also wants to try and pretend that the issue magically stopped after the local pol…

That’s a 2024 article about an incident that happened in 2019. You can see the date mentioned in this non-paywalled write up: https://freespeechunion.org/i-too-had-visit-from-police-over... This is why it’s important to show sources so that (understandable) mistakes like this can be pointed out. If you keep posting sources that have been misinterpreted or that lack important context (which again is understandable - I…

> That’s a 2024 article about an incident that happened in 2019.

That page isn't rendering at all for me in Firefox for some reason, but I can read the text and it appears the Bindel incident was in 2024, and the Pearson incident which is referenced was in 2019. So, no, the 2024 incident happened in 2024.

I'll also note that in the Telegraph article I linked, the prominent author also describes the experience as Orwellian, so the view is hardly as niche or exaggerated as you want it to be.

> then we can’t really take your word for it that you’ve Googled and found lots of better examples.

Maybe, but at this point it seems your looking to dismiss incidents without reading them properly yourself.

Have some more links to incidents that happened after 2019 though, feel free to put each one under a microscope and find reasons to dismiss them, while continuing to ignore a trend and not see the forest for the trees:

- https://unherd.com/newsroom/why-is-the-met-police-investigat...

- https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13233691/Scots-Tory...

- https://freespeechunion.org/police-log-hate-incident-for-ref...

And in case you want to continue to insist that the issue was resolved due to that one case in 2019, I'll leave you with this excerpt from an article on this very issue[0]:

----

Is the new Code better?

It sets a higher threshold, stating that NCHIs should only be recorded against individuals if there is "a real risk of significant harm" or crime. But problems remain: the police inspectorate HMICFRS found that 25% of recent NCHIs and hate crimes were wrongly recorded. Police reported being confused by attempts to train them in the Code; many still struggle to distinguish between a crime and an NCHI. This confusion is clear in the most famous recent case. The Daily Telegraph journalist Allison Pearson said that Essex Police visited her in November, wishing to record an NCHI against her (because on X/ Twitter she had mistakenly described two protesters as "Jew haters"). Essex Police denied it was an NCHI case, saying Pearson had been investigated for a public order offence. Either way, the case was dropped after an outcry.

[0]https://theweek.com/crime/nchis-the-controversy-over-non-cri...

Post reply on HN