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

Petition to Withdraw Canada's Bill C-22

ourcommons.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 176 posts

Re: Petition to Withdraw Canada's Bill C-22

#161

Post by Ray20 »

allthetime wrote: post #111
cmrdporcupine wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Basically the same idiocy that the British gov't has also tried to enact around making actually encrypted communication impossible, and giving them the rights to access metadata on the public's communications without warrant, etc.

How is it possible to make encrypted communication impossible? It’s (for us) trivial to encrypt and sign a message with GPG for instance. Does this allow the government to come to my house if I trade these messages with friends?

> How is it possible to make encrypted communication impossible?

Illegal, not impossible

Re: Petition to Withdraw Canada's Bill C-22

#162

Post by Ray20 »

zuzululu wrote: post #51
llm_nerd wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's online and easy to read, and is a modernizing of laws around online systems. It is a deeply imperfect bill -- personally I think it is basically DOA and will not receive assent -- but a lot of the reaction to it are classic partisan hysterics (you can already see a bunch of those people throughout this discussion). https://www.parl.ca/DocumentViewer/en/45-1/bill/C-22/first-r... The parts that are garnering a lot…

how would they force vpns like mullvad to turn over the log when there isn't any? are they just going to ban specific vpn providers then ? this is absurd!

> this is absurd!

Why? Сountries pass laws, companies that don't comply are fined, shut down, blocked, and their owners are prosecuted and imprisoned. That is how it works already, nothing new or absurd here.

Re: Petition to Withdraw Canada's Bill C-22

#163

Post by llm_nerd »

slopinthebag wrote: post #134
llm_nerd wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The issue is that our economy has been in decline for years Yup. We had a housing and immigration based economy. >Simply reducing population growth is not enough to fix the last 10 years. Ah, so damned if they do, damned if they don't. Yes, getting unchecked immigration under control was absolutely a problem that needed to be fixed (they still aren't there, and the TFW and "student" pipelines are a major remaining p…

I’m not sure why you’re so eager to blame immigration for the economy doing poorly. Cutting immigration only makes the economy worse unless you offset that by creating growth elsewhere, which hasn’t seemed to happen in the last 10 years, nor the last ~350 days. C-22 is not a tiny, minor thing. It has massive repercussions for people’s privacy and security, as well as for the economy. If it was some minor thing, why s…

>I’m not sure why you’re so eager to blame immigration for the economy doing poorly.

YOU complained about immigration. Immigration and housing allowed the government to basically ignore economic policies, productivity, and so on, for a lost decade. It allowed partisans (just like you) to declare that GDP went up so everything is great and nothing can be criticized, as Canadians got poorer and worse off. And yes, fixing a problem -- unsustainable, outrageously destructive mass immigration -- has consequences, but they're well worth it. YOU are the one who brought up per capita GDP.

>The liberals were literally reelected on the basis that Mark Carney is a master economist and he is our only saviour against Trump.

Eh, considering everything we're doing fantastic, and we're in a much better position for the next century. I hope that USMCA falls apart, personally, however much some small but extremely loud minority of my bootlicking, wanna-be-MAGA countrymen want to be a poor work colony of the US for eternity. Bowing to rapist bullying by a corrupt failing idiocracy is never a winning move.

Re: Petition to Withdraw Canada's Bill C-22

#166

Post by newsclues »

__turbobrew__ wrote: post #75
stackghost wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the tyranny of the majority. Ontario and Quebec together are like 65% of Canadians. I'm in BC and have made my peace with that. I would imagine people in PEI feel a similar way. Probably people living in Hope or Quesnel also feel similar about being steamrolled by Metro Vancouver and Victoria.

I get that Quebec and Ontario have 65% of the population, but why do they have 100% of the seats on a committee that shoves surveillance and gun bans down everyone else’s throats?

Because the laurentian elite rule Canada and the liberal party is the political arm of the power corporation

Re: Petition to Withdraw Canada's Bill C-22

#167

Post by naasking »

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #101
tamimio wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because US has far better opportunities and more money. My personal experience in doing business in Canada: each industry is monopolized by two or three companies, you need to get their “blessing” before you can do anything in that sector. Government contracts aren’t much, but even with that, it’s nepotism based, you will get a contract knowing someone who will indirectly get benefits from you, for example you will h…

Yep, ever the same since the Hudsons Bay Company and the Northwest Company ran the whole place. Now it's just the Westons and Rogers and Bell instead. Some years ago when I first moved to my farm out here in the Hamilton area there was a meeting about zoning bylaws, as the city was finally -- after 20 years -- harmonizing the rural zoning laws after the municipal amalgamation that Mike Harris had forced on them back…

> Why on earth would you go out of your way to do that? If someone wants to try it, why stop them? She just took it for granted that their job was to enshrine the existing state of things in a formal law.

This is exactly the Canadian experience: restrictions without thought.

Re: Petition to Withdraw Canada's Bill C-22

#169

Post by alexandre_m »

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #71
alexandre_m wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You know the conservatives are supporting this bill as well... right? That is not true at all. https://www.conservative.ca/cpc/stop-online-government-surve...

Fair enough, this was not the case when I looked last week. They were "concerned" but had not posted anything in opposition. And when I looked this morning all I found was they'd asked it to be split into two bills. Implying they want to support some but not all. Which is worrisome. EDIT: wait, the thing linked here by you only says they want to amend it. That's a far cry from killing the bill. So, no, they're not op…

Conservatives are against the whole surveillance on citizens aspect, that is the "Supporting Authorized Access to Information Act" part of this bill about electronic devices and service providers, the core controversial issue of this discussion, which they want removed.

Conservatives have been very critical about it since the beginning. You can find plenty of sources where they discuss this.

Re: Petition to Withdraw Canada's Bill C-22

#170

Post by alephnerd »

voidnap wrote: post #157
alephnerd wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Smh what's with these dumb takes. Literally the only thing blocking a self-sustaining Canadian tech scene is the lack of capital. Has anyone who comments these hot takes ever talked with Canadian founders or tried to raise capital in Canada?!? Do y'all even know what a term sheet is? It doesn't matter if you live in Quebec, Alberta, or Nunavut - why the hell would I as a fund manager at Ontario Teachers, ScotiaBank,…

> The Carney admin has started to make the right moves. What moves in particular?

The creation of the Strong Fund, the Tech Fund, and sector specific SWFs like the Food Security Fund which can all participate in the VC Action Plan, along with increased coordination between provincial funds and the federal government and increasingly serious conversations about providing a tax shelter for venture and early stage capital in Canada.
Post reply on HN