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

Restoring Trust in Government and the Internet

schneier.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 122 posts

Re: Restoring Trust in Government and the Internet

#41

Post by RyanMcGreal »

jseliger wrote: post #34
junto wrote: post #33

The question is then; in a two party system where both offer the blue pill, who the hell do you vote for? Neither Democrats nor Republicans will change this. Due to the way that the political system works, a third party isn't possible. In the UK we have a Conservative/Liberal coalition, where traditionally Liberals were strong privacy advocates, but now turn a blind eye to the massive Orwellian/Huxley-esque society g…

The question is then; in a two party system where both offer the blue pill, who the hell do you vote for? Greens or libertarians, which I have been doing for a long time. Real change starts at the ballot box.

The problem with "Real change starts at X" statements is that they necessarily handwave around the circularity of the problems we face.

We can't get better policies until we elect better parties, but we can't elect better parties until we address campaign finance and fix the electoral system, but we can't address campaign finance and fix the electoral system until we elect better parties willing to pass better policies. And the merry-go-round goes on and on.

Re: Restoring Trust in Government and the Internet

#42

Post by lifeisstillgood »

mseebach wrote: post #40
lifeisstillgood wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it has gone beyond that - if Obama stood up and said "I've made that phone call, Gen. Alexander is turning off PRISM as we speak" would anyone believe it? Its verifiability that counts.

Well, he could very easily create an independent committee with input from EFF and such organisations (they should be able to find some technically competent people with TS clearances they trust) to go in and review the systems.

You mean the same process of "putting arms beyond reach" that Western governments insist terrorist organisations use, usually before talks begin?

Could be, as long as we also look at Truth and Reconciliation committees too ...

Wow. They have really lost trust of a pretty significant section of society.

Re: Restoring Trust in Government and the Internet

#43

Post by RyanMcGreal »

DanielBMarkham wrote: post #7

A lot of people in tech want to complain about innovation. Why are there so many Farmville apps and nobody seems to be solving important problems? Well here you are, the biggest and most important problem in modern society today, the fact that our governments are recording most everything that we're doing. And they will use these recordings as they see fit in the future. You couldn't ask for a bigger or more importan…

I agree that easy, broadly-accessible secure communication is an important problem to solve, but it does not address the (arguably larger) problem of eroded social trust. A low-trust society just doesn't work very well, and no amount of technical mitigation is going to compensate for that.

Re: Restoring Trust in Government and the Internet

#44

Post by roc »

junto wrote: post #33

The question is then; in a two party system where both offer the blue pill, who the hell do you vote for? Neither Democrats nor Republicans will change this. Due to the way that the political system works, a third party isn't possible. In the UK we have a Conservative/Liberal coalition, where traditionally Liberals were strong privacy advocates, but now turn a blind eye to the massive Orwellian/Huxley-esque society g…

> "who the hell do you vote for?"

Primary challengers who uphold the other values you personally share, but also share our values on the subject of privacy, the 4th amendment, reigning in the expanding police/surveillance state, etc.

Re: Restoring Trust in Government and the Internet

#45

Post by dllthomas »

twoodfin wrote: post #6

It's interesting to compare the framing of this column with Schneier's commentary on the revelations of NSA surveillance in 2005: http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2005/12/nsa_and_bushs_... It's full of "Bush did X", "Bush wanted Y". Now he says the NSA has "gone rogue". Huh. If Schneier is as unhappy with today's programs as he was with 2005's, then perhaps he should communicate a bit more clearly that today's o…

Back then, Republicans supported the programs overwhelmingly. Now, it's Democrats. I think distancing the objections from partisan-ly charged individuals might be the better tack, in terms of actually rallying support, even if it is "unfair."

Re: Restoring Trust in Government and the Internet

#46

Post by dllthomas »

roc wrote: post #44
junto wrote: post #33

The question is then; in a two party system where both offer the blue pill, who the hell do you vote for? Neither Democrats nor Republicans will change this. Due to the way that the political system works, a third party isn't possible. In the UK we have a Conservative/Liberal coalition, where traditionally Liberals were strong privacy advocates, but now turn a blind eye to the massive Orwellian/Huxley-esque society g…

> "who the hell do you vote for?" Primary challengers who uphold the other values you personally share, but also share our values on the subject of privacy, the 4th amendment, reigning in the expanding police/surveillance state, etc.

And not just at the national level. A lot of the organization of both parties involves state-level politicians.

Re: Restoring Trust in Government and the Internet

#47

Post by DanielBMarkham »

RyanMcGreal wrote: post #43
DanielBMarkham wrote: post #7

A lot of people in tech want to complain about innovation. Why are there so many Farmville apps and nobody seems to be solving important problems? Well here you are, the biggest and most important problem in modern society today, the fact that our governments are recording most everything that we're doing. And they will use these recordings as they see fit in the future. You couldn't ask for a bigger or more importan…

I agree that easy, broadly-accessible secure communication is an important problem to solve, but it does not address the (arguably larger) problem of eroded social trust. A low-trust society just doesn't work very well, and no amount of technical mitigation is going to compensate for that.

I agree, but I think the trust that is required is trust in transactions, whether electronic, commercial, or otherwise, not particularly trust in people or institutions.

To take the current NSA issue, if I take the time to vote for a Congress guy, in return I'm expecting somebody to represent my area in Washington. He doesn't have to agree with me, just represent me. If, in fact, he doesn't know what's going on, or is so captured by the political system that he's unable to make independent decisions, I've lost faith in that transaction.

I never may have liked the guy, or ever agreed with him, or trusted him farther than I could throw him, but we had a deal as a society where I did something and he was supposed to do something. If those societal transactions are not to be trusted, the wheels come off the wagon.

Same kind of discussion applies for electronic transactions, say using SMTP to move email around.

Re: Restoring Trust in Government and the Internet

#48

Post by gbhn »

twoodfin wrote: post #11
tkellogg wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think its as simple as "ending it with a phone call". Billion dollar programs don't ever get killed that easy.

It is literally that simple. If Bush ordered this surveillance started, Obama can order it stopped. The NSA works for him. If they don't do as he asks he can start firing people until they do. Obviously Schneier understood this when he wrote his 2005 column.

Yes. The Obama fiasco has been a huge disappointment. I'm interested in ideas about what could have been done differently -- Obama talked a very good game during his candidacy about issues of this sort. The really big indicator he was being dishonest was the post-election flip-flop over unwarranted wiretaps.

Only picking candidates that have a track record of opposition to programs like this would be good, but such candidates are in very short supply. (Feingold is about the only one that comes to mind.)

Re: Restoring Trust in Government and the Internet

#49

Post by northwest »

> Transparency first involves coming clean. Not a little bit at a time, not only when you have to, but complete disclosure about everything.

I have this uneasy feeling that they will fight this as long as they can. I'm not sure true transparency will ever happen, without drastic measures.

Their strategy will probably be:

1) Wait for the end of the revelations

2) Assess the level of public outrage

3) Make the cheapest concessions possible (a bit like Ms Merkel recently canceling the old "spying pact" that was never used)

Re: Restoring Trust in Government and the Internet

#50

Post by javert »

jseliger wrote: post #37
junto wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is great and I would even good as far to say 'noble', but in a political system like the United States, your vote is wasted, because your vote is not proportionally represented in the House of Representatives. It means you face an ever-challenging battle against almost impossible odds in order to get your green or libertarian candidate into the House of Representatives.

your vote is wasted I beg to differ: if enough people vote for candidates who don't affiliate with the Republicans or Democrats, we'll see real change. Every vote counts. Hell, if Republicans and Democrats start seeing 10% of the votes going to greens or libertarians, they'll pay real close attention.

But in asking people to vote libertarian, you're asking people to suffer mightily in the short term for a thin possibility of gain in the very long term.

Because you're saying, "Don't vote for the lesser of two evils; vote for this other candidate who can't get elected, just to send a message."

And then the more evil candidate gets elected, because the better people vote libertarian.

And then it's not even clear if there will _be_ a long term.

Post reply on HN