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

An American Privacy Emergency

scottaaronson.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 154 posts

Re: An American Privacy Emergency

#91

Post by atoav »

wxw wrote: post #63

> On June 4, 2026, the U.S. Secretary of Commerce issued a directive (DAO 216-26) > DAO-216-26 bans differential privacy and other modern (and not so modern) techniques. It restricts disclosure avoidance techniques to “coarsening,” > DAO-216-26 forbids “noise infusion”, described as “methods that involve modifying a dataset by adding random values, or noise.” > By forbidding noise infusion, the directive bans the dis…

It is not cursed. It is actively trying to cement its own power like the authoritarian fascists they are. And some of you still pretend if they just cheer enough for dear leader the tide will turn for them as well. As if this all was just a sports game where you have to cheer for your team even if they actively break the rules.

Re: An American Privacy Emergency

#94

Post by aosmith »

cwillu wrote: post #33
aosmith wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right and I'm generally not a fan of vibe coding but I'm not trying to make money and it's free YMMV.

You didn't even bother to check if there's any relevance to the article before posting your vibe-coded project.

[flagged]

Re: An American Privacy Emergency

#96

Post by spiderfarmer »

tjwebbnorfolk wrote: post #79
kg wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people currently in power want every single byte of data they can get on people who reside in this country so they can divide them up by arbitrary criteria and do with those groups as they please. Depending on the person, that might mean imprisonment, it might mean deportation, it might mean something worse.

> so they can divide them up by arbitrary criteria and do with those groups as they please You mean like by race, gender, and sexual orientation, and using statistical analysis to portray a group of oppressors vs. oppressed, perpetrators and victims? Exactly what was happening via official public policy for the last 4 years while the progressives cheered it on?

You won't convince anyone with "angry Facebook grandpa" style comments.

Please explain to us in great detail how exactly "official public policy" did that, including the laws and changes that were pushed to do so.

And explain why, if that were the case, conservatives are doing nothing to stop that.

Why would anyone continue to do something bad, just because the people you hate started it?

Re: An American Privacy Emergency

#98

Post by jackpirate »

wxw wrote: post #63

> On June 4, 2026, the U.S. Secretary of Commerce issued a directive (DAO 216-26) > DAO-216-26 bans differential privacy and other modern (and not so modern) techniques. It restricts disclosure avoidance techniques to “coarsening,” > DAO-216-26 forbids “noise infusion”, described as “methods that involve modifying a dataset by adding random values, or noise.” > By forbidding noise infusion, the directive bans the dis…

Coursening is not as elegant as differential privacy. But using coursening is not a "privacy emergency", it is a very-slightly-less-accurate census. And no one knows what the actual economic impacts of this level of accuracy difference are.

I would love to see the more elegant techniques used, and also have the intuition that this is bad policy, but I don't see the "emergency" here. Labeling it as such just histrionic to me.

Re: An American Privacy Emergency

#99

Post by rightbyte »

BobbyTables2 wrote: post #78
vineyardmike wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I only-kinda-jokingly say that I'd be willing to be the sacrifice and get a second mortgage on my house if it could buy the entire nation some new rights. Our politicians routinely sell out smaller issues for "downpayment in a coastal metro" level of money. It's just about within reach of a middle-class urban adult to directly fund with some personal sacrifices. I feel like we like to imagine that these corporations…

Always wondered about this… Are politicians really so beholden to an anonymous donor that makes a single $50k donation? Or even a single $500k one? Or is it the real knowledge that said known regular donors will continue indefinitely as long as things go their way (and indefinitely support the opposition otherwise) …? The pessimistic part of me wonders if a grassroots campaign that raised $10M would even be able driv…

I think it is more that corps select which politician gets ahead than that they are beholden to them.

50k USD is a an awful lot of money for a lower level politician to run an election campaign with.

Post reply on HN