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

Tech firms seek to frustrate internet history log law

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 170 posts

Re: Tech firms seek to frustrate internet history log law

#141

Post by tn13 »

zmmmmm wrote: post #53

The logical end point, if you think it through, is scary for technology. There will be a battle for a time where legislators play cat and mouse with technology and privacy companies. But as each new hole appears, they'll invent new laws to close them off. This wouldn't be so bad except for the problem that encryption is math and short of making math illegal there will always be a hole. Factor in steganography and it…

> Software development, already dominated by tech behemoths, will become completely out of reach of small development teams simply because the regulatory burden is so high.

I think what will prevent the above from happening is inability of government to enforce laws on the books, people disregard for those laws and the fact that technology experiments are often positive sums games where Google, Microsoft and Oracle stand to lose more by blocking entry to small players through regulatory mechanisms.

If we look at the majority of tech law suites we can easily observe that there is no clear winner and either parties seem to have achieved only small term gains.

But I most certainly see that government will successfully kill innovation when it comes to heavily regulated industries such as education, drugs, medicine and biotech.

Re: Tech firms seek to frustrate internet history log law

#142

Post by tn13 »

digler999 wrote: post #134
SomeStupidPoint wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US has at least one mechanism against that: the first amendment. Content and format are both matters of speech, so the choice of format and the decision to broadcast noise as a statement are both protected. I expect that will come under attack, but it's a very fundamental part of US law used unambiguously. So we might also see civil war 2 before they get that legally changed.

They'll get around it on a technicality. Just like NSA did with the 4th Amendment. "Yeah, sure we capture US citizens' data, but we don't do it on US soil and use another moniker (GCHQ) so its ok. Not our fault AT&T routed your call outside of constitutional jurisdiction!". I'm expecting something like, "Yeah, sure you can have your 1st amendment, you just have to give us the keys if we ask or you get charged with de…

An we will arrest you for obstructing arrest.

Re: Tech firms seek to frustrate internet history log law

#143

Post by tn13 »

Bullies are cowards. That lesson from school is generally true for bullies in real world too.

Government is just that coward bully. True that US government's tyranny has been rise year on year under leadership of presidents of all political stripes and yet it has meant zilch for either their political goals states good objectives.

All the recent wars by US government have been massive and spectacular failures, fight against terrorism has only created far more threats, people's approval of drug legalization is all time high, gays are safest they have ever been and it is easiest to get almost any kind of gun illegally than in past.

Politicians are very eager to control you life but they are so incompetent with that power that eventually it would not matter. The only problem I see that increasing government spending which will slow down US economy.

Re: Tech firms seek to frustrate internet history log law

#144

Post by CoryG89 »

arca_vorago wrote: post #138

Having visited England recently, despite the surveillance engine being prepped in the US, the contrast of the extent and the lack of rights and legal means in the UK to protect the people from bad laws like this was palpable. So look at it this way, at least you don't live there. If we keep headed in the same direction though it won't be long before we forget all the reasons for the American Revolution and let the gl…

Seems doubtful that the founding fathers and revolutionists thought their "oaths" to the crown meant much either.

I don't want to join any empire, but I would advocate for globalism, which I don't believe is the same thing as imperialism.

I guess I may just be one of those treacherous Americans though.

Re: Tech firms seek to frustrate internet history log law

#146

Post by AsyncAwait »

Sean1708 wrote: post #131
yAnonymous wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

VPN isn't even that good of a protection anymore when all countries the traffic goes through log it and cooperate. VPN providers would have to introduce a random delay for their users, otherwise looking at all the exact times along the way gives a pretty good idea who accesses what.

Not if your VPN is outside the UK surely?

If things like the TPP are signed, doesn't really matter if you're in the UK or one of the signature countries, which is almost all of them.

Re: Tech firms seek to frustrate internet history log law

#147

Post by dehugger »

tn13 wrote: post #143

Bullies are cowards. That lesson from school is generally true for bullies in real world too. Government is just that coward bully. True that US government's tyranny has been rise year on year under leadership of presidents of all political stripes and yet it has meant zilch for either their political goals states good objectives. All the recent wars by US government have been massive and spectacular failures, fight…

You know this article is about the UK, not the US, right? By and large I agree with you, but its not the United States that passed this into law.

Re: Tech firms seek to frustrate internet history log law

#148

Post by anigbrowl »

digler999 wrote: post #136
zmmmmm wrote: post #53

The logical end point, if you think it through, is scary for technology. There will be a battle for a time where legislators play cat and mouse with technology and privacy companies. But as each new hole appears, they'll invent new laws to close them off. This wouldn't be so bad except for the problem that encryption is math and short of making math illegal there will always be a hole. Factor in steganography and it…

> Software development, already dominated by tech behemoths, will become completely out of reach of small development teams simply because the regulatory burden is so high. It might sound OT to bring up TPP in a discussion like this, but please hear me out: It's important to block broad international agreements like TPP because it creates competition among nations that would protect us from the dystopia you describe.…

Let's say one nation, Uruguay, says "you know what ? Encryption is fine. And btw we're funding 1gb cheap fiber to everyone in our biggest city". Something like that could attract swarms of techies.

It could, but it probably won't, because hardly anyone is going to move to a new country just so they can enjoy encryption and fast web browsing...and I say that as someone who has moved internationally 6 times.

Look, your argument is fundamentally weak - we can generalize and say big countries are bad because it eliminates competition between smaller jurisdictions, therefore federalism is bad. And indeed, the notion that federalism is bad (or at least damn risky) is partly why the USA has ~3000 county governments despite the manifest inefficiency involved.

Your error is in assuming that competition is always beneficial. As we can see in the US, counties and states frequently pass laws that reduce rather than enhance freedom. So while I wouldn't want you to construe this as an endorsement of the TPP in particular, I reject your claim that any kind of trade agreement is necessarily destructive of freedom.

Besides, your notion of comeptition as unalloyed good is easy enough to subvert. Uruguay sets up the world's freest internet? Denounce Uruguay as a haven for cyber-criminals and impose penalties on unverified connections from there. Despite the fact that it makes the digiterati uncomfortable, things like child porn and terrorism are genuine problems that impact the lives of real people when allowed to operate unchecked. This isn't a 'think of the children' argument; I personally know people who were trafficked for sex and child porn as small children and who suffer from serious dysfunction as adults because of this. Their liberty and safety shouldn't be considered acceptable sacrifices on the altar of your liberty and safety; there are valid reasons to delegitimize some kinds of commercial traffic.

Re: Tech firms seek to frustrate internet history log law

#149

Post by anigbrowl »

oliverjudge wrote: post #2

The scariest line was this: "Terrorists and serious criminals will always seek to avoid detection." The fact that in the public eye they're going to be claiming they are doing this under terrorism, will give a lot of weight with non-technical people.

That's true, but on the other hand their assertion is also true - terrorists (both political and paramilitary) do attempt to exploit the infrastructure of an open society, and government (qua public agency) does have a legitimate interest in frustrating some kinds of criminal traffic.

You try running a government and explaining to people that the price of liberty is putting up with a certain level of terrorism and child porn every year. You won't stay in power long if you do. (Mind, I'm not endorsing this new law, which I think is awful. I'm just taking issue with your objection to the political reasoning, and saying that it's self-defeating.)

Re: Tech firms seek to frustrate internet history log law

#150

Post by terravion »

anigbrowl wrote: post #148
digler999 wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Software development, already dominated by tech behemoths, will become completely out of reach of small development teams simply because the regulatory burden is so high. It might sound OT to bring up TPP in a discussion like this, but please hear me out: It's important to block broad international agreements like TPP because it creates competition among nations that would protect us from the dystopia you describe.…

Let's say one nation, Uruguay, says "you know what ? Encryption is fine. And btw we're funding 1gb cheap fiber to everyone in our biggest city". Something like that could attract swarms of techies. It could, but it probably won't, because hardly anyone is going to move to a new country just so they can enjoy encryption and fast web browsing...and I say that as someone who has moved internationally 6 times. Look, your…

While it is true that people (besides the very rich and very desperate) usually don't try and migrate to escape laws, corporations do it all the time and think about it proactively. It is particularly easy for technology companies to say, great I'll do all my hosting in Uruguay instead of Britain, make my terms of service under Uruguayan law, etc.

If Uruguay becomes a criminal sanctuary--then sure maybe it will be ostracized internationally--but as long as law abiding, upright business people have legitimate business there its more enlightened policy will make others think twice about enacting less enlightened ones and give companies some options. Moreover, it gives companies tied to Britain a strong incentive to advocate for a reasonable policy so they are not placed at a competitive disadvantage.

This doesn't mean that lawmaking has to be a false choice between anarchy and totalitarian surveillance, just that the OP's point that more variance in jurisdictions, the higher the pressure on the least permissive to mitigate the worst excesses is a real phenomenon.

Post reply on HN