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

Code Specialists Oppose U.S. and British Access to Encrypted Communication

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 222 posts

Re: Code Specialists Oppose U.S. and British Access to Encrypted Communication

#161

Post by marcosdumay »

KnightHawk3 wrote: post #111
saiya-jin wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not american either, so what? you completely disregard that any handgun, including these mythical "assault rifles" (which is stupid term by definition, it's usage which defines purpose, so why there aren't any assault pistols?) is just a tool, needing a trained hand to be used. as described below, automatic weapons are not purchasable for civilians, only their modified versions that allow single shot per trigger…

I am Australian and mostly agree with the gun laws in my country. >P.S. one last thing - pro-gun-ban people completely disregard gun shooting as a means for hunting and as a fun activity at range. Many weapons, including mentioned AR-15 (civilian version of popular M16) will never be shot outside shooting range. Why use higher caliber guns instead of some puny .22? Because it's more fun! From my understanding, removi…

I'm a Brazilian, and I completely supported the creation of the gun control laws we currently have.

That said, I think our data is clear enough. As soon as we took the guns out of the streets, violence started to increase in a much bigger rate, and we are now almost in a civil war situation. Looks like the US stereotypical idea of a good men with a gun being the best deterrence to a bad men with a gun bears some truth.

Re: Code Specialists Oppose U.S. and British Access to Encrypted Communication

#162

Post by bshanks »

phkahler wrote: post #12

This debate seems like a manifestation of a problem with governments: They think they can legislate anything they want. Need access to some communications - green light for massive data collection. Some of it is encrypted - just mandate a back door. School shooting - new gun laws. Any problem activity - we'll just make it illegal. Something not getting done - we'll just mandate someone take care of it. They really do…

One potential fix is to insert a countervailing bias into political procedures to make it harder for restrictions on freedom to get passed. For example, one could say that a simple majority (>50%) is enough to repeal rules, increase individual rights, or decrease government authority; but a >=60% majority is needed to do the opposite (create new rules, decrease individual rights, increase government authority).

Re: Code Specialists Oppose U.S. and British Access to Encrypted Communication

#163

Post by cmurf »

phkahler wrote: post #12

This debate seems like a manifestation of a problem with governments: They think they can legislate anything they want. Need access to some communications - green light for massive data collection. Some of it is encrypted - just mandate a back door. School shooting - new gun laws. Any problem activity - we'll just make it illegal. Something not getting done - we'll just mandate someone take care of it. They really do…

No one ever said sovereigns always come to the correct conclusion. That's not their mandate. It's social order. That's why it's important for citizens, and their representatives in this case, to be educated, and have the ability to affect decisions of the government. Sadly those with the most influence right now are simultaneously of narrow vision, and aren't that educated right now.

When Comey says that "two sides are talking past each other" who are on the other side? Because it's inappropriate for him to propose "two sides" are crypto experts and non-experts should be given equal weighting in the debate as if effectively breaking encryption has only mainly upsides.

Re: Code Specialists Oppose U.S. and British Access to Encrypted Communication

#164

Post by jakeogh »

pyre wrote: post #159
jakeogh wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe that's technically true, honestly I doubt it, once you give information to the gov, it keeps it. Legal or not. Evil-doers care not about whatever law anyway, it's just a burden and an obvious infringement on the people's right to keep and bear arms. What's next? Background checks for 3D printers? Maybe some DRM to keep us safe?

> Evil-doers Are these people that just have the "evil bit" flipped to true? Tossing around the word "evil" just seems like you're asking for a politicized "debate."

That's fair. Kinda. I'm referring to the people who unjustly kill. I should have said "murderer".

Re: Code Specialists Oppose U.S. and British Access to Encrypted Communication

#165

Post by adestefan »

How is there no mention of CALEA[0] in this document? They even hint at it in the Executive Summary:

Indeed, in 1992, the FBI’s Advanced Telephony Unit warned that within three years Title III wiretaps would be useless: no more than 40% would be intelligible and that in the worst case all might be rendered useless [2]. The world did not “go dark.” On the contrary, law enforcement has much better and more effective surveillance capabilities now than it did then.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_Assistance_for_...

Re: Code Specialists Oppose U.S. and British Access to Encrypted Communication

#166

Post by voronoff »

tedks wrote: post #154
vezzy-fnord wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you saying you disagree that the Constitution is considered less relevant today than it was in the earlier history of the United States? Yes. If anything, our First Amendment rights are now more robust than they were in the past. We have almost nothing like a modern-day equivalent to Anthony Comstock. The amount of obscenities you can get away with these days is higher thanks to people like Al Goldstein, Lenny Br…

>Left-wing politics, though hardly major, are no longer subject to any real suppression beyond punditry's ignorance. This is not really true. Left-wing political groups are still actively suppressed by police organizations on a regular basis, as well as Islamic groups (religious and secular), LGBT rights groups, and generally anyone involved in protesting. Police see protest groups as antagonists and act to disrupt t…

It's a far cry from The Red Scare, though, which was his point.

Re: Code Specialists Oppose U.S. and British Access to Encrypted Communication

#167

Post by DickingAround »

sanderjd wrote: post #147
vezzy-fnord wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find this is done universally. Every time some shooting or similar disaster occurs, the actual perpetrator is among the last to take the blame. It's the video games, it's the music, it's the toxic culture of masculinity, it's the pharmaceutical drugs, or it's the Zionist media poisoning our children with Judeo-Bolshevist propaganda. The obsession is with the "one single cause", but more importantly the opportunity…

None of this rings true to me. I've never heard or read anything like "it wasn't the perpetrator's fault, it was XYZ", but rather "it was the perpetrator's fault, and I wonder if XYZ contributes to the prevalence of such perpetrators". In the US at least, there certainly appears to be something going on outside of random happenstance[0], so it makes sense to think and talk about what that may be. Certainly many peopl…

I think the difference is people spend relatively little time on the perpetrator having some propensity to have issues (as will happen to some people when you have 7 billions-strong-bell-curve of them) and a lot of time on what could have triggered/exacerbated their issue (which could be a lot of things that don't cause issues in most people). For example, video games, pot, guns, etc. which don't cause issues in most users but seem related to issues in some users. This leads to an over focus on banning the thing most people use without issue rather than recognizing the statistics of 'out of 7 billions people some will have issues'.

Re: Code Specialists Oppose U.S. and British Access to Encrypted Communication

#168

Post by wcummings »

rm_-rf_slash wrote: post #8
happyscrappy wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you think that China is ascendant, but the fact remains that the West is closely aligned and utterly dominant.

It is not a simple east/west matter. States themselves are in a period of declining influence after a historically abnormal 400 years of strong states and a state-based order. Their power to influence culture, drive people's decisions, set prices and drive morals is being eaten by multinational corporations, religious institutions, NGO's, online communities like Reddit and HN, name it. State influence is shrinking, a…

Globalization has weakened The State, in general, though not all states equally.

Re: Code Specialists Oppose U.S. and British Access to Encrypted Communication

#169

Post by Lawtonfogle »

splawn wrote: post #153
Lawtonfogle wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Murder is harder to fudge. Actually it is quite easy. For evidence, see >Firearm homicide in the US per 100k >Proportion of homicides from firearms That you can so easily switch between murder and homicide makes the numbers really easy to fudge to most people who don't consider the differences between the two.

I am not following you. Do the differences really matter in this case? EDIT: Don't read this as snarky disagreement. Rather, Im just confused and genuinely want to understand.

Simply put, homicide can be constructed to include suicides as well as accidental deaths. While these are issues with guns, they aren't the same issue as murder and should be treated differently (consider how often you see "pool related homicides" when discussing accidental drownings of children). Even if one was going to include them, then they should be clear when they are using terminology that is not only often misunderstood by readers but which has been knowingly used by others to mislead.

This is not to say that these other issues should be ignored. Having a gun in the home is more likely to make a suicide attempt result in death and that is an issue that should be discussed and dealt with. But it should be done so openly and recognizing it is a separate, though related, issue.

Re: Code Specialists Oppose U.S. and British Access to Encrypted Communication

#170

Post by fapjacks »

homunculus wrote: post #105
wl wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An assault rifle is a select-fire (having the option of more than one shot per trigger pull) rifle shooting an intermediate cartridge. An AR-15 is not an assault rifle because it isn't a select-fire. The M16, which the AR-15 is based on, is an select-fire weapon and is thus is an assault rifle. The main difference between an AR-15 and a hunting rifle is that the hunting rifle tends to use a more powerful cartridge. T…

I'm not trying to be obtuse but don't most hunting rifles still work on a bolt action model thus requiring an operator to chamber a round manually whereas the AR-15, and rifles like it, 'automatically' chambers the next round in a fraction of a second.

Depends on your definition of "hunting rifle". A lot of hunters use bolt-action rifles, yes. But a lot of (at least American) hunters also use semi-automatic rifles.

The labels on these things end up being one of the core problems. What is an assault rifle? What is a high-cap magazine? Certainly these terms are familiar to those of us with experience with firearms. But to hear politicians throw the terms around, you'd think they had no clue (and I suppose they often don't), even though they supposedly have "experts" on hand to help them make their decisions. What it (usually) boils down to is people with a decision already made going into the "decision-making process" and justifying their already-made decision with whatever materials and personnel they have on hand.

Which is the wrong way to run anything, let alone a government.

Post reply on HN