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

TikTok will not introduce end-to-end encryption, saying it makes users less safe

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 458 posts

Re: TikTok will not introduce end-to-end encryption, saying it makes users less safe

#101

Post by consp »

Nursie wrote: post #96
echelon wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a slippery slope. This is the next two steps into 1984. Once you start mandating this, there's no going back. The next generation will start associating wrongthink with government IDs. (Wait, we already do that, right?)

> It's a slippery slope. Is it? I thought that was a logical fallacy? > This is the next two steps into 1984. How so? > Once you start mandating this, there's no going back. > The next generation will start associating wrongthink with government IDs. Could you provide some more details on why you think this? For a start I talked about a scheme in which you don't hand over ID.

Slippery slope can be argumental if you provide the actual argumental reasoning for it as I was thought it could be used as deductive argumentation (though that does not say much). On itself it is a fallacy.

I don't see how verifiable credentials with zero knowledge proofs provide that however.

Re: TikTok will not introduce end-to-end encryption, saying it makes users less safe

#102

Post by wiseowise »

halapro wrote: post #18
ronsor wrote: post #6

Why would you use TikTok for private communications anyway? It's mostly a public short video sharing platform.

It's the kids' social network, you're just old.

> you just have intact brain

Fixed a bit.

Re: TikTok will not introduce end-to-end encryption, saying it makes users less safe

#103

Post by jjmarr »

consp wrote: post #98
jjmarr wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Instead children would own special devices that are locked down and tagged with a "underage" flag when interacting with online services, while adults could continue as normal. California is mandating OSes provide ages to app stores, and HN lost their mind because it's a ban on Linux.

> California is mandating OSes provide ages to app stores, They forgot to put in the provision which exempts apps which do not need an age rating? As in: everything os related. Sounds like a good way to get rid of snap at least since that is where all the commercial bloat is located. Last time I did a fresh Debian install I do not remember installing any app from the os repository which would require age restrictions…

> They forgot to put in the provision which exempts apps which do not need an age rating? As in: everything os related.

That's correct. You need to provide your age to install grep.

Re: TikTok will not introduce end-to-end encryption, saying it makes users less safe

#104

Post by TkTech »

k1musab1 wrote: post #100
azinman2 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would be a nightmare to implement and achieve the goal, but I have to say I think it’s more right than wrong. All of the data is very clear about the harms. China has restrictions for social media and screen time for kids — how do they implement this?

Passport /citizen ID linked to your WOW account, etc.

Which has never worked. Korea had a system to prevent kids from gaming after midnight for something like 15 years. All it did was make Korean kids very good at memorizing their parents ID.

Re: TikTok will not introduce end-to-end encryption, saying it makes users less safe

#106

Post by bdamm »

ThoAppelsin wrote: post #77

DMs are akin to private conversations in real life. Thus, every DM feature should entail E2EE. It’s ok for a platform to not feature private conversations. They should just have no DM feature at all, then; make all messages publicly visible. Private conversations are indeed not for all ages. Parents should be able to grant access to that on individual basis.

Ah, but you see, soon TikTok will allow parents to spy on their children's DMs, and parents will love this.

Re: TikTok will not introduce end-to-end encryption, saying it makes users less safe

#107

Post by drawfloat »

echelon wrote: post #82
Nursie wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Age verification should be banned Why? > They already got so much data on their users There are a variety of ways (see "Verifiable Credentials") that ages can be verified without handing over any data other than "Is old enough" to social media services.

It's a slippery slope. This is the next two steps into 1984. Once you start mandating this, there's no going back. The next generation will start associating wrongthink with government IDs. (Wait, we already do that, right?)

Read another book.

Re: TikTok will not introduce end-to-end encryption, saying it makes users less safe

#108

Post by debazel »

azinman2 wrote: post #89
debazel wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Children are just too effect of a tool when building a surveillance state. We should have banned children from owning open computers a long time ago just like we do with Alcohol, Driving licenses, etc. Instead children would own special devices that are locked down and tagged with a "underage" flag when interacting with online services, while adults could continue as normal. We already heavily restrict the freedom of…

Would be a nightmare to implement and achieve the goal, but I have to say I think it’s more right than wrong. All of the data is very clear about the harms. China has restrictions for social media and screen time for kids — how do they implement this?

I actually think this would be easier to implement than many of the current ID verification methods I've seen being pushed. We already have the infrastructure for selling age restricted goods, this is nothing new. Manufacturers that are unable to restrict their hardware in a "child" mode don't have to do anything and could simply continue selling to adults only.

It's obvious we're moving in a direction where we are going to get these restrictions in one way or another, and this is the only way I've come up with that doesn't come with serious privacy implications.

Most importantly, this solution would be simple for anyone to understand. You don't need to be a cryptography expert to understand there are child safe devices and then there are unrestricted devices for adults.

Re: TikTok will not introduce end-to-end encryption, saying it makes users less safe

#109

Post by greybcg »

debazel wrote: post #39
xeckr wrote: post #22

Brilliant. They're repackaging the argument governments have long made about E2EE being dangerous to children.

Children are just too effect of a tool when building a surveillance state. We should have banned children from owning open computers a long time ago just like we do with Alcohol, Driving licenses, etc. Instead children would own special devices that are locked down and tagged with a "underage" flag when interacting with online services, while adults could continue as normal. We already heavily restrict the freedom of…

At the same time, I remember growing up in the internet's wild west and bad encounters weren't an issue for me because of the golden rule I was taught from the start: you don't give your personal information and you don't interact with complete strangers. Learning to navigate the web instead of being in a walled garden was helpful in many ways.

The better question to ask ourselves is, does the capability to gather more information also lead to more power to act on this information? If the investigative resources are spread thin already it's not like they're gonna catch more criminals with investing more there. Repelling questionable individuals off the platform with lots transparancy -is- an effective way, but just a specific tool for a symptom.

I think a part of a better solution is to give parents and children better tools to manage their social graph themselves. Essentially the real problem is discovery and warding off of social outliers in a way that doesnt out all responsibility on opaque algos or corporations.

A part of their e2e keys could be shared using an intentionally obtuse way like mailing an item or a physical "friend code". That way parents and vetted friends can have their privacy. You don't need to tie an id to someone's person to get positive confirmation on someone's poor behaviour. If someone crossed the line then parents can see it and escalate. In additon, what would happen to a child with abusive parents who can then arbitrarily restrict and deny a childs freedom to communicate? I did not have this myself, but without free access to other minds and information I would have been duller. Does a large information dragnet really serve our collective interests or are more precise tools needed?

Re: TikTok will not introduce end-to-end encryption, saying it makes users less safe

#110

Post by threatofrain »

xeckr wrote: post #22

Brilliant. They're repackaging the argument governments have long made about E2EE being dangerous to children.

Ultimately your neighbors must buy the argument. The reason why this argument wins is not because framing is so tricky, but because it connects with the values of your neighbors. Trying to convince people that these aren't actually their values is swimming upriver.
Post reply on HN