I have a feeling that a large of portion of Meta's revenue lies with helping mass surveillance efforts in the West. Is it in their financials?
Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain
51–60 of 374 posts
Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain
#52Worth mentioning that Canadian PM Mark Carney is the ex-head of the Bank of England and has a long list of pro-uk/globalist affiliations. Given the globalist aligned states and territories are the most on-board in progressing mass surveillance currently, it's sadly not a surprise.
Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain
#53Is this one also the work of Meta?
It's not just me thinking this. I do want more data on this though. It is in their financial statements in terms of a revenue source?
Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain
#54[flagged]
Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> The truth is, most of the time when people complain about surveillance state or privacy, its because they just want to spout of a bunch of baseless propaganda like race realism or anti vax. Normal people aren't affected by this - nobody cares enough about politics, and most people aren't intelligent enough to form a dangerous opinion. That's not the truth. Everyone's affected and the risk will only continue to rise…
[dead]
Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain
#56Regarding warrantless searches and access ... reading the text of the bill (OP link) warrants seem to be required. Simple, right? Well, no, this is a recently inserted block of text in the bill (confirm at the link above): Exception (2. 7)(b) However, a copy of the warrant is not required to be given to a person under subsection (2. 6) if the judge or justice who issues the warrant sets aside the requirement in respe…
I don't really see an issue with this section. A judge still needs to issue a warrant, they can also additionally waive the requirement that the cop gives you a copy right away, in special circumstances. Like are you envisioning a "I totally have a warrant but I don't have to give it to you" type situation? I think it's fairly unlikely, and you would likely be able to get the search ruled inadmissible if a cop tried…
It’s a huge problem. The warrant is the document the absence of which lets the public know something wrong is being done to them. A warrant is not just a term for judicial approval.
The public must have the ability to easily verify police conduct is appropriate, and it must match the cadence of the police work.
Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain
#57Is this one also the work of Meta?
You forgot to add /s! As a foreigner, It would be near impossible for one company to ask every govt in that world to make this happen (with current political weather conditions). HN people will always find someway to connect this to their most hated companies (be it Meta, Google, Microsoft)
Meta is definitely lobbying in Canada, I don't know why you think this is so far fetched.
Near impossible? No, meta is frequently making themselves part of conversation on various regulations in the country.
Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you familiar with parallel construction? That's what this is for. If they have a warrant and show it to you, it says what they can search and why. If they don't tell you what they're searching for and why, they can look for anything, and then construct a separate scenario which just happens to expose the thing they knew would be there from the first fishing expedition. They then use this (usually circumstantial)…
But the warrant still has to originally exist with, presumably, a timestamp that shows it existed prior to the search. And modification of the timestamp or lack of such a feature would be a good way to get the evidence thrown out?
That’s not how evidence works in Canada. Illegally obtained evidence is still evidence - you simply also have a tort against the officer for breaching your rights.
Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you familiar with parallel construction? That's what this is for. If they have a warrant and show it to you, it says what they can search and why. If they don't tell you what they're searching for and why, they can look for anything, and then construct a separate scenario which just happens to expose the thing they knew would be there from the first fishing expedition. They then use this (usually circumstantial)…
But the warrant still has to originally exist with, presumably, a timestamp that shows it existed prior to the search. And modification of the timestamp or lack of such a feature would be a good way to get the evidence thrown out?
The existence of a category of warrants that allows operation that is indistinguishable from warrantless searches creates a kind of legal hazard and personal risk that is hard to overlook. Police lie on the regular.
Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
“Canada is doing just fine” Found the federal govt employee or boomer who bought real estate in the 90s
Even people who bought up til like 2015 are doing well. Housing in Canada really imploded 2015-2023 or so. Before that, it was still very frothy, but low rates and high immigration and poor policy around speculation and flipping of homes really turned the whole country tits up re: housing.
What, $600k for a 1 bedroom condo on a busy arterial road doesn't seem reasonable to you!?
/s
The federal housing minister literally 2 days ago stood up in the House of Commons and associated the housing cost catastrophe with the war in Iran that's been happening for a week.
Thankfully prices on that front are slowly declining. Another $200k to go at least before they make any sense.