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

An Open Letter to HN from EFF, Demand Progress, and Cory Doctorow

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 106 posts

Re: An Open Letter to HN from EFF, Demand Progress, and Cory Doctorow

#91

Post by jjh42 »

AYBABTME wrote: post #30
aragot wrote: post #9

As foreigners, should we care? Next time someone organizes something similar, can they think of a worlwide action? Can they make something which doesn't sound like "Worldwide anti-american day" but rather "Worldwide day of support to the debate that US citizen started"? US citizens are only 313 millions and the US law protects you against surveillance. We, the rest of the world, are all subject to this surveillance i…

Might sound lame, but as a foreigner, I deliberately avoid posting my opinions on the subject by fear of repercussion for the day I'll cross the US border and they'll have decided unilaterally that my opinions are suspicious. From my perspective, it's like they read everything, look at your Facebook posts, your emails and what not, trying to profile you as a threat. And when they do so, you'll get on some listed that…

This is a real concern. I held the same view for awhile. In the end, however, I decide the small risk was outweighed by the importance of the issue.

The more people that voice their opinions, the more impossible it becomes to punish that group (i.e. safety in numbers). Join in!

Re: An Open Letter to HN from EFF, Demand Progress, and Cory Doctorow

#92

Post by scrabble »

callcongressnow wrote: post #72
bushido wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe we need to take the shawshank redemption approach "Still, I'd like to try, with your permission. I'll send a letter a week. They can't ignore me forever." Let's build automated tools allowing people to send out letters, signed petitions, emails, faxes, pre-recorded voicemail etc. That would would potentially eliminate procrastination. Just a thought.

A friend worked at a congress person's office a while back. When I told her about automating calls, she was not pleased. Very high noise to signal ratio. I think that effort would be better invested in informing the public and giving them better tools than mindlessly spamming their offices. https://github.com/zmaril/callcongressnow/issues/1

It's the fact that people aren't pleased that helps cause change. Things don't change unless there's something uncomfortable happening that someone wants to stop.

Re: An Open Letter to HN from EFF, Demand Progress, and Cory Doctorow

#93

Post by chill1 »

hugofirth wrote: post #31

This might seem like an off the wall idea but as (in my mind ) this issue is part policy and part engineering problem, would co-ordinated themed hackathons focused around the idea of creating disruptive & secure communication techniques and protocols both further this general cause and appeal to the HN crowd at large?

This is already being worked on by a few folks. [1][2]

If you have the skills and drive to help, I would suggest looking into those two projects.

[1] https://crypto.cat/

[2] https://whispersystems.org/

Re: An Open Letter to HN from EFF, Demand Progress, and Cory Doctorow

#94

Post by cpymchn »

adventured wrote: post #87

I strongly disagree with the way you're using Aaron Swartz / his memory here.

At first reading, I too am uncomfortable enlisting someone's memory like this. Not sure why. And not that I am on one side or the other, but at first thought I would have said advocating for reform to the CFAA would be a more fitting to tribute to Aaron's memory. No?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act

I didn't know him but I am not trying to rally around him for a cause either.

Re: An Open Letter to HN from EFF, Demand Progress, and Cory Doctorow

#95

Post by pyre »

drone wrote: post #49
pyre wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about the Five Eyes countries? This is less of an adversarial "you are spying on us, so we should be able to spy on you," and more of a "the NSA has invited our country to spy on US citizens so that they can get data from us." At the very least, some of that responsibility comes from the NSA.

I'm not speaking to specific actions, or existing agreements, I'm speaking to reciprocity. The most effective way to get from others is to give the same. Edit: actually, 5 eyes is a perfect example of a negative (in this context) reciprocal agreement. We should work to create the opposite sort of reciprocal agreement.

But You-Don't-Spy-On-Me-I-Don't-Spy-On-You agreements aren't really worth much. If you're doing spying it's not out in the open, and how many countries would be willing to (e.g.) embargo trade with the US if spying every came to light? This goes the same way with China too. The US has called out China on espionage, yet where are the repercussions for China? Did the US terminate trade with China?

Re: An Open Letter to HN from EFF, Demand Progress, and Cory Doctorow

#96

Post by thaumasiotes »

mortyseinfeld wrote: post #57
chimeracoder wrote: post #3

As someone who has done a fair amount of activism and advocacy work, I'll say this: Over the last 6 months, I've seen a number of people make comments on relevant HN posts to the effect of "This sucks, but how do we actually change anything" This is what you've been waiting for - here's a chance to actually do something about it. Don't be discouraged when things seem to be standing still. Because of the way our minds…

Any Good Samaritan law that comes with an obligation is absolutely horrible and dangerous to free societies.

Can you elaborate on why you said this? Searching for "new york drug good samaritan law" brought me to this bill:

http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?default_fld=&bn=A02063&term...

Which appears to say that

2. Someone seeking health care for themselves related to a drug or alcohol overdose cannot be prosecuted for drug or alcohol use (based on evidence obtained as a result of seeking care),

1. In recognition that a person experiencing drug overdose may not be in a state to seek health care for themselves, and people sometimes engage in drug use in groups of two, someone seeking health care for a third party experiencing drug overdose cannot be prosecuted for their own drug use (based on evidence obtained as a result of seeking care),

and 5. In recognition that no one would ever engage in drug use in groups of three or more, any evidence obtained as a result of someone seeking health care may be freely used against anyone who neither made the request for health care nor experienced the overdose themselves.

(There is also some text about class A-I and A-II felonies being exempt from the good samaritan provisions.)

I don't see any obligation mentioned in the bill, although point 5 does seem a little ill-advised to me.

Re: An Open Letter to HN from EFF, Demand Progress, and Cory Doctorow

#97

Post by mkempe »

No matter how imperfect this initiative is, it is so much better than nothing. I frankly never grok the negativism. (Is it a form of nihilism?) I give to the EFF. I speak up whenever the subject comes up. You can, too, and you should find your personal path to support freedom. Our freedom. "An injury to one is an injury to all." Aaron's persecution and death was an injury to all. The Clipper chip was crushed under Clinton -- many other interferences with our lives can and must be crushed. It's never over, it's always worth fighting.

If you think it's insufficient action, you be our new Sam Adams or Patrick Henry! I'll join, with determination and passion.

Re: An Open Letter to HN from EFF, Demand Progress, and Cory Doctorow

#98

Post by hnha »

quadrangle wrote: post #90
hnha wrote: post #7

With all due respect, using Aaron Schwartz's case about copyright as motivator for the case against surveillance seems weird. Why do you even need some personification?

As stated by others, Aaron happened to be involved in a copyright issue relating to his legal situation. But his most significant impact on the world is not about copyright specifically but freedom in general. He founded Demand Progress and was key in the fight against SOPA. That's the significance.

I, and I guess others judging.by the votes my post got, had no idea. Thanks!

Still, sopa and pipa were copyright/censorship, not surveillance.

Re: An Open Letter to HN from EFF, Demand Progress, and Cory Doctorow

#99

Post by abofh »

dragonwriter wrote: post #67
rosser wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're concerned with they want Americans to think about surveillance. That's markedly different from caring what we actually think.

> They're concerned with they want Americans to think about surveillance. That's markedly different from caring what we actually think. Having a desire for somone to think a particular thing about a subject is exactly caring what they actually think about a subject. I think the distinction you want to draw is more between being influenced by what Americans actually think, on the one hand, and attempting to influence…

I believe the hypothesis is stated as "Foreign legs good, American legs better"
Post reply on HN