Live data from Hacker News

Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain

michaelgeist.ca

201–210 of 374 posts

Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain

#201
post #142

It feels like many democratic leaders are starting to think the CCP model—mass surveillance of citizens—is the right direction, with growing demands for chat control, facial verification, age verification, and more. Fxxk any politician who thinks they are above the citizens in a democracy.

[dead]

Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain

#202
post #142

It feels like many democratic leaders are starting to think the CCP model—mass surveillance of citizens—is the right direction, with growing demands for chat control, facial verification, age verification, and more. Fxxk any politician who thinks they are above the citizens in a democracy.

Getting a warrant for each person is not "mass surveillance". Why do you think a warrant is not required? It is.

Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain

#204
post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"He who gives up a little freedom for security deserves neither"

I never understood this quote. I happily gave up the freedom of driving without a seatbelt for security, what does that say about me?

The quote refers to a Faustian bargain offered by the Penn's. They'd bankroll securing a township, as long as the township gave up the ability to tax them. The quote points out that by giving up the liberty to tax, for short term protection, ultimately the township would end up having neither the freedom to tax to fund further defense, or long term security so might as well hold onto the ability to tax and just figure out the security issue.

Moral: don't give up freedoms for temporary gains. It never balances out in the end.

Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain

#206
It's sad I think we need complete control of "mainstream" internet because most people just scroll TikTok and believe whatever filter bubble they are in, and will vote thereafter.

The majority of people have intellectually regressed into sheep.

Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain

#207
post #142

It feels like many democratic leaders are starting to think the CCP model—mass surveillance of citizens—is the right direction, with growing demands for chat control, facial verification, age verification, and more. Fxxk any politician who thinks they are above the citizens in a democracy.

I believe that's it's sadly a necessity for control of the population when you have other superpowers employing this. If you are Europe, and you have democratic elections, you have an informational power asymmetry towards the states that have mass surveillance and control. You are (as we saw last year with the Romanian election that was swung to 60% in 2 weeks over TikTok) susceptible towards influence of other super…

Regarding banning platforms I’d say just ban the attention driven business model online by forbidding all social media platforms from serving ads entirely.

Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain

#208

It's sad I think we need complete control of "mainstream" internet because most people just scroll TikTok and believe whatever filter bubble they are in, and will vote thereafter. The majority of people have intellectually regressed into sheep.

[dead]

Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain

#210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A lot of us strongly push against these types of measures not because we have anything to hide nor because we are on the side of the criminals. I had this view as well until I realized it’s predicated on living in a high trust society. At some point you reach a critical mass of crime that is so rampant, and the rule of law has so broken down that it’s basically Mad Max out there, and then these idealistic philosoph…

>I had this view as well until I realized it’s predicated on living in a high trust society. At some point you reach a critical mass of crime that is so rampant, and the rule of law has so broken down that it’s basically Mad Max out there, and then these idealistic philosophies start to fall apart. I see "High Trust Society" so much as a weird racist dogwhistle, but feel free to disabuse me of that notion. I live in…

Re: High trust society general means people are pointing to some implicit unwritten structures that stop something from happening.

Collective notions of shame, actual networks of friends and families that reinforce correct behaviour or issue corrections.

Think about simply how credit networks form and function. And why visiting a food truck or medieval travelling doctor for your vial of ointment is different from buying special products from a brick and mortar establishment.

Basically if you or the network has a harder time back propagating defaults and bad credit in a way that prevents future bad outcomes then that is a loss of high trust.

This isn't about race really unless you are operating at the level of some biological or genetic connection to behaviour ... But that is a pretty strange place to be as there a whole host of confounding factors that are much more obvious and believable and I cast serious doubt that even a motivated racist would ever credibly be able to do empirical studies showing causal links between any given genetic population cluster and the emergent societal behaviour. These are such high dimensional systems it just seems insane to even think one could measure this effect.

The invisible substrate is the society unfortunately ... And we are all bad at writing it down and measuring it.

Post reply on HN