Earlier quoted context omitted.
This was a premise considered a very long time ago when it came to the NSA's snooping. People were (still are?) putting keywords in every email, etc. It didn't make any difference, and inherently can't. Here's why. Scenario 1) It works. You get arrested on some arbitrary basis for impeding their system. Or they otherwise make it illegal to do so, and begin cracking down on that. Scenario 2) You throw a vast amount of…
>Scenario 1) It works. You get arrested on some arbitrary basis for impeding their system. Or they otherwise make it illegal to do so, and begin cracking down on that. That will be hard first amendment case in US ... very hard.
French National Assembly approved Internet traffic monitoring system (French)
141–150 of 222 posts
Re: French National Assembly approved Internet traffic monitoring system (French)
#142---
It was in a nearly empty senate that around thirty deupties
cast their votes [...] on the installation of "black boxes",
a controversial device designed to monitor internet traffic.
[It was] approved by 25 deupties to 5 following heated debates.
The plan: to force ISPs to "detect, through automated
processing, a suspect succession of connection data" that
appear to match patterns typically used by terrorists. In
practice, this would involve installing a "black box" at ISPs
to monitor traffic. The content of the communications would
not be monitored, but only the metadata: the sender or
receiver of a message, the IP address of a visited site...
[...]
"The black box is the Pandora's box of this draft law," said
socialist Aurélie Filippetti in the senate. "They say that the
masses of data that will flow through it will only contain
metadata. But they contain even more information about the
private lives of our fellow citizens! [...] And there is a
paradox in saying that these data will be anonymous when they
are to be used to identify terrorists".
An accusation that was then defended by the government in the
house, "The automated processing marks out suspect behaviour,
not pre-identified persons," emphasized the Defence Minister,
Jean-Yves Le Drian, "It is after that the services are able to
access the identity of the persons."
[...]
Some deputies also pointed out the "economically damaging"
consequences of these black boxes, such as the ecologist
Isabelle Attard, for whom "French IT companies will see their
foreign clients start to desert them as they lose their trust".
Last week, seven large French hosts made their opposition to the
draft clear, stating that it would push them "into exile" so as
not to lose their clients.
[...]
The government nevertheless eluded the more technical questions
throughout the debate, asked, several times, by a few deputies,
among those was Laure de la Raudière (UMP), "Where are you going
to install your probe on the communication networks?", "How will
you optimize the algorithms?", "Will you use deep packet
inspection?".
Bernard Cazeneuve ended up replying to this last question,
repeated several times by the deputy, "We will not use this
technique at all", a technique that involves the deep inspection
[translation of a translation...] of all passing communications
data.
Several deputies have also demanded a precise list of the type of
metadata collected by the black boxes to be clearly defined.
In vain.
---Re: French National Assembly approved Internet traffic monitoring system (French)
#143Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This law was voted by 30 delegates. From a total of 577 This is how democracy dies. Now the 95% other members of the National Assembly will say "that it's not their fault, because they didn't even vote for it!", if some major abuses happen due to this in the future. Despicable.
> This is how democracy dies. We need a system of government that allows scientists and thinkers to have a weighted power balancing politicians. POliticians cannot be trusted by definition
Probably true elsewhere, but I only know the US.
Re: French National Assembly approved Internet traffic monitoring system (French)
#144Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, you need direct democracy. With modern communications, there is no reason to organize frequent elections on key issues, like in Switzerland.
Direct democracy only works if most of the voters have: 1) sufficient general education; 2) sufficient domain education; 3) time to read the law; 4) time to reflect on the law; 5) peers to discuss at length and with depth the law; etc. It's more efficient to have delegation systems. The problem is that both politicians and the press are corrupted delegation systems.
Re: French National Assembly approved Internet traffic monitoring system (French)
#145La Quadrature du Net has also affirmed that while they were demonstrating in front of the National Assembly, there were two IMSI Catchers. And the law wasn't even passed yet. Great example of what will happen. ( http://www.franceinfo.fr/actu/politique/article/des-appareil... link in french, can provide a translation if needed) Bernard Cazeneuve, our ministre de l'Intérieur (Tasked with internal security, i.e. police…
Re: French National Assembly approved Internet traffic monitoring system (French)
#146Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not a silver bullet. With this we'd still have the death penalty; or voted for populists measures like banning minarets.
Ooh, what a delightfully aristocratic objection. We can't give the lesser peoples self-rule, they'd rule themselves wrong!! Have you considered any noblesse oblige -style colonization and rule of third-world nations? Sounds like a good match.
Re: French National Assembly approved Internet traffic monitoring system (French)
#147It is not a hasard to have this kind of laws in France. France hasn't known dictatorship for long. French representatives don't know what a Stasi-like security state would look like. It would be harder to have such a law in Germany. The low number of delegates during the vote whows how archaic the French politic system is: they are against their own party so they prefer to be missing. There is little discussion. And…
You probably meant "Its not by chance that France get this kind of law". Because "Not a hasard" (hazard) means "not dangerous", making your whole post confusing.
Re: French National Assembly approved Internet traffic monitoring system (French)
#148La Quadrature du Net has also affirmed that while they were demonstrating in front of the National Assembly, there were two IMSI Catchers. And the law wasn't even passed yet. Great example of what will happen. ( http://www.franceinfo.fr/actu/politique/article/des-appareil... link in french, can provide a translation if needed) Bernard Cazeneuve, our ministre de l'Intérieur (Tasked with internal security, i.e. police…
Why would you recommend TrueCrypt? That's a terrible suggestion.
Re: French National Assembly approved Internet traffic monitoring system (French)
#149La Quadrature du Net has also affirmed that while they were demonstrating in front of the National Assembly, there were two IMSI Catchers. And the law wasn't even passed yet. Great example of what will happen. ( http://www.franceinfo.fr/actu/politique/article/des-appareil... link in french, can provide a translation if needed) Bernard Cazeneuve, our ministre de l'Intérieur (Tasked with internal security, i.e. police…
Why would you recommend TrueCrypt? That's a terrible suggestion.
Re: French National Assembly approved Internet traffic monitoring system (French)
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, you need direct democracy. With modern communications, there is no reason to organize frequent elections on key issues, like in Switzerland.
Direct democracy only works if most of the voters have: 1) sufficient general education; 2) sufficient domain education; 3) time to read the law; 4) time to reflect on the law; 5) peers to discuss at length and with depth the law; etc. It's more efficient to have delegation systems. The problem is that both politicians and the press are corrupted delegation systems.