I’m sorry, but if that’s your idea of freedom, you can fucking keep it. Our police, though not saints, don’t shoot unarmed people. At least in Britain we are free from being shot in school.
Yet there are significantly more British citizens moving to America than the reverse. So they do seek the American Freedom and Constitution. Massive brain drain (despite the predictions it would flow the other way around thanks to the 2016 election).
I’m sorry, but if that’s your idea of freedom, you can fucking keep it. Our police, though not saints, don’t shoot unarmed people. At least in Britain we are free from being shot in school.
Yet there are significantly more British citizens moving to America than the reverse. So they do seek the American Freedom and Constitution. Massive brain drain (despite the predictions it would flow the other way around thanks to the 2016 election). Always puzzled me.
It doesn't automatically follow that people moving to America means they want the American Freedom (proper noun?) and Constitution. As for the brain drain aspect, it's said that people who move from New Zealand to Australia raise the average IQ of both countries; they are very obviously moving for the higher salaries rather than freedom and constitution.
The "children" excuse + most of the population saying "I don't need privacy, I have nothing to hide" is a double whammy against any form of encryption and it's just a matter of time before our Internet privacy rights are completely stripped away. A huge educational campaign is necessary to convince people and the average politician that being pro-encryption doesn't mean being criminals or pedophiles. So it's a lost b…
100% I see you posting an opinion I agree strongly with here often. Glad you’re still at it. I will offer a positive side to this situation. Their war against math proves the math works and they don’t have an internal workaround. Since a war against math is bound to fail in long term (just like the war on vegetables aka “war on drugs”), short term victories of oppression won’t shut down the future. The children angle…
Setting aside the question of whether signal are the good guys or not it's important for non-UK people to understand the political context here. The conservative party is eating itself. They have forced 2 leaders to resign in the last year and are trailing in the polls so are terrified of the next election. They won convincingly at the last election on the basis of a "red wall" strategy that involved an appeal to tra…
So what is Labour's position on this? Aren't they demanding the exact same thing using slightly different rhetoric?
The only principled parliamentary opposition to undermining encryption that I'm aware of has been coming from David Davis, conservative MP and arch-brexiteer [1].
Maybe there are others like him, but this is by no means a polarising issue in British politics.
Except you can't kill someone with encryption. Your freedoms end where my freedoms begin, and guns are just a tool to change that dynamic. They serve no other purpose, unless we're talking hunting, for which you can still get guns, after some education. I don't get how Americans seem to think it makes sense to require a license to drive a car but not to own a gun? Who is more dangerous, a guy driving a sedan or one h…
A gun is self defence incarnate. The right to effective self defence is a natural right and requires no license. Americans use guns defensively hundreds of thousands times a year. Encryption can very much be used to facilitate murder. Your data is not as important as your life.
> The right to effective self defence is a natural right
I don't see how that's correct, defending oneself with something natural sounds OK though.
100% I see you posting an opinion I agree strongly with here often. Glad you’re still at it. I will offer a positive side to this situation. Their war against math proves the math works and they don’t have an internal workaround. Since a war against math is bound to fail in long term (just like the war on vegetables aka “war on drugs”), short term victories of oppression won’t shut down the future. The children angle…
[flagged]
I'm having a hard time taking a website called "free minds and free markets" seriously as a reliable source.
I suspect if they did, the funding for the project might see a cut. Russians (gov) would get annoyed since apparently they have broken or bypassed Signal's encryption. Brits would get annoyed because they can't use something they've funded.
> Russians (gov) would get annoyed since apparently they have broken or bypassed Signal's encryption. Got a source for that?
Make no mistake: the Online Safety Bill has absolutely nothing to do with protecting children. End-to-end encryption is the first line of defence against government approved mass surveillance. If it falls, the rest will follow. It will only be a short period until the operation is expanded under the guise of additional "protections" against the citizens.
The "children" excuse + most of the population saying "I don't need privacy, I have nothing to hide" is a double whammy against any form of encryption and it's just a matter of time before our Internet privacy rights are completely stripped away. A huge educational campaign is necessary to convince people and the average politician that being pro-encryption doesn't mean being criminals or pedophiles. So it's a lost b…
There is already a more subtle problem here, at least in countries with case law. The people who end up on trial trying to defend encryption are typically guilty (as very roughly 90% of people who go to trial are). Many of them are guilty of things that most of us look very strongly down upon, like possessing and sharing child sexual abuse material. Thus if you want to set a strong precedent for protection of encryption, you end up defending exactly this sort of person.
Telegram I think is considered safe? But TBF signal is end to end encrypted which means at least the content if your chats are safe. This is in my opinion safe enough, but YMMV I guess
Telegram is, I believe, generally worse than Signal for privacy. Both have FOSS clients and offer E2E chats (good), although Telegram doesn't make them the default. Both require the use of phone numbers for identification and store some of your metadata in their central servers (bad). Both dabbled with the idea of privacy-preserving monetization via cryptocurrencies, and both failed spectacularly (funny). Telegram is…
I stand corrected! I might have actually confused the background of the two apps with eachother...
Setting aside the question of whether signal are the good guys or not it's important for non-UK people to understand the political context here. The conservative party is eating itself. They have forced 2 leaders to resign in the last year and are trailing in the polls so are terrified of the next election. They won convincingly at the last election on the basis of a "red wall" strategy that involved an appeal to tra…
So what is Labour's position on this? Aren't they demanding the exact same thing using slightly different rhetoric? The only principled parliamentary opposition to undermining encryption that I'm aware of has been coming from David Davis, conservative MP and arch-brexiteer [1]. Maybe there are others like him, but this is by no means a polarising issue in British politics. [1] https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/20…
Probably. One of the problems of "tough on crime" framing in politics is no politician wants to be seen as "weak on crime" so it ends up being a race to the bottom on civil liberties.