UK surveillance bill includes powers to limit end-to-end encryption • Hacker News Board

Re: UK surveillance bill includes powers to limit end-to-end encryption

#171

Post by AdeptusAquinas » Tue, Jul 26, 2016, 2:11 AM UTC

bsder wrote: post #159

blowski wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what is the solution? If we spend all our time arguing what the solution isn't, we leave a big vacuum which is then filled with even more garbage ideas.

The solution is to go on with your life . You cannot stop terrorism, but you can take out it's sting. We seem to have forgotten the lessons about the IRA, et al. In addition, when people say "solutions" what they mean is "something that doesn't inconvenience me or require me to do anything". However if you want "real" solutions, here are some: 1) Start denouncing ALL religion as the force for stupidity that it actual…

Hmm, I think your first two points are a bit harsh and don't cover the whole picture.

1) Religion is not really the problem. There are a over a billion muslims in the world, and a little more than that who are Christians. The percentage of each that are involved in violence, even major wars, is so small to be statistically insignificant (definitely less than 1% or even 0.1% (or even 0.00001% if you just consider terrorists)). When religion does come into play its typically in a more ethnocentric way - e.g. religion-as-race.

2) most of the current problems, including those coming out of iraq, were not due to 'petroleum', but rather internal rebellions and foreign interference that is probably more political/ideological than financial in nature. A certain mindset might attribute a lot of the problems in the middle east to politicians a decade earlier seeking to win elections by looking tough on dictators, but not having the willpower to deal with the aftermath of their intervention.

The other points are good, though blaming 'freetrade' as the cause for unemployment and/or other financial troubles is probably a bit simplistic.

Re: UK surveillance bill includes powers to limit end-to-end encryption

#172

Post by krapp » Tue, Jul 26, 2016, 2:14 AM UTC

blowski wrote: post #135

maker1138 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The solution to the problem is not preventing people from communicating securely.

So what is the solution? If we spend all our time arguing what the solution isn't, we leave a big vacuum which is then filled with even more garbage ideas.

The solution is accepting that the potential for crime, even mass murder, is a necessity for a free society, and that it's better for some terrorists to succeed than for everyone to live under a government that sees all, knows all, hears all and cannot possibly be risen up against. The greater threat to life and liberty always comes from a government's response to terrorism, not from any act of terrorism itself.

Treat terrorism as just another crime, nothing special, nothing existentially critical. Nothing to fight a war against the entire world over. Governments already have the tools they need to fight terrorists without limiting encryption, they simply choose not to use the tools they have, because they would rather use terrorism as a pretext for grabbing power.

Re: UK surveillance bill includes powers to limit end-to-end encryption

#173

Post by throw2016 » Tue, Jul 26, 2016, 2:29 AM UTC

kiba wrote: post #145

reitanqild wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There has been a significant increase in the frequency and effectiveness of terrorist attacks in Europe. People are growing more worried about it. This is important to understand. Also it is important to understand that right now Europeans are losing security for no good reason: We could help a lot more refugees in surrounding countries than we can integrate here. It is really that simple IMO. Seens we are allowing…

We are getting a flow of immigrants because the civil war in Syria did not stop, and instead rage on and on destroying the infrastructure and economy there that is needed to sustain the civilian population there. We are squeamish because we do not want to send young men and women to die in some godforsaken country, doing god know what for god knows how long. Remember the last time that happened? Oh yes, the Iraqi occ…

The only reason the refugees exist in the first place is some one wants to get rid of Assad for their own self serving objectives, just like Saddam and Gaddafi.

All this while propping up despots in Saudi Arabia who run the most backward extremist regime in the world by far and make the former 3 look teadybearish in comparison.

These upstanding 'allies' are principally responsible for the global spread of wahhabism, extremism and terrorism in both financing and ideology over the last 30 years.

By a strange coincidence SA is also the west's best friend in the region. Ergo since the foreign policy division of the US and EU cannot be in any way or form characterised as naive they are in effect promoting terrorism on one hand and expending billions building the infrastructure for totalitarian surveillance security states on the other.

Millions of lives are being destroyed because of greed. The more things change the more they remain the same.

Re: UK surveillance bill includes powers to limit end-to-end encryption

#174

Post by reitanqild » Tue, Jul 26, 2016, 3:35 AM UTC

gakada wrote: post #148

reitanqild wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There has been a significant increase in the frequency and effectiveness of terrorist attacks in Europe. People are growing more worried about it. This is important to understand. Also it is important to understand that right now Europeans are losing security for no good reason: We could help a lot more refugees in surrounding countries than we can integrate here. It is really that simple IMO. Seens we are allowing…

In what way are EU states 'allowing this stream of immigrants'? The refugees are entering through illegal crossings. By definition, their entry is not allowed, but happens regardless.

EU could have enforced the existing rules much stricter though or even implemented stricter rules.

Re: UK surveillance bill includes powers to limit end-to-end encryption

#175

Post by repsilat » Tue, Jul 26, 2016, 4:11 AM UTC

marcosdumay wrote: post #158

kiba wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are getting a flow of immigrants because the civil war in Syria did not stop, and instead rage on and on destroying the infrastructure and economy there that is needed to sustain the civilian population there. We are squeamish because we do not want to send young men and women to die in some godforsaken country, doing god know what for god knows how long. Remember the last time that happened? Oh yes, the Iraqi occ…

> Remember the last time that happened? Wait, what?! The Iraq occupation is what caused this madness. The solution is certainly not doing another one.

No, not the occupation.

To the extent the recent actions (or inaction) of the West can be blamed, you can blame it on getting rid of Saddam, or you can blame it on leaving Iraq too early, or you can blame it on policy in Syria. You can't blame it on sticking around in Iraq. Iraq was getting objectively better after the surge -- a (flawed) democracy was emerging, the economy was taking off, violent deaths were way down from their peak.

You can argue that Maliki forced the US out and let the country go to hell (in which case "deposing Saddam" is the Western sin), or argue that the US could have stayed if it wanted (in which case if you're a Democrat you can blame it on "deposing Saddam, because we couldn't stick around forever," and if you're a Republican you can blame it on Obama wanting to get out before the job was done to score political points.)

Other than that, though, you're left with earlier Western actions (Bush I, Sykes Picot...) or Assad or Maliki or every crazy Wahhabi cleric in the region of you want to give Arabs some credit and capacity for self-determination too.

Re: UK surveillance bill includes powers to limit end-to-end encryption

#176

Post by Retra » Tue, Jul 26, 2016, 4:13 AM UTC

spacecop wrote: post #168

bsder wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The solution is to go on with your life . You cannot stop terrorism, but you can take out it's sting. We seem to have forgotten the lessons about the IRA, et al. In addition, when people say "solutions" what they mean is "something that doesn't inconvenience me or require me to do anything". However if you want "real" solutions, here are some: 1) Start denouncing ALL religion as the force for stupidity that it actual…

Tips fedora Lol, these suggestions are ridiculous, could you possibly be more out of touch with the billions of other people that surround you

You're never going to find a solution to a hard problem by appealing to the whims of the masses.

Re: UK surveillance bill includes powers to limit end-to-end encryption

#177

Post by tomjen3 » Tue, Jul 26, 2016, 4:26 AM UTC

blowski wrote: post #53

tetrep wrote: post #24

I think this same logic that is purportedly the reasoning behind this bill would also require us to constantly record all of our vocal communications, as that would be the only way we could ensure that criminals could not have communications that aren't accessible to law enforcement. This, of course, would require microphones on all citizens as well as many more in the surrounding environment, to ensure communication…

I'm going to play Devil's Advocate here, because complaining about intrusions on our privacy and how ineffective they are, has become de rigeur on HN and Reddit without much dissent. There clearly is a security problem in Europe at the moment, and I'm assuming that the attacks are not being organised by the security services. So will this bill reduce, increase or have no effect on the attacks? If not, then what would…

The security problem is lone wolfs, who by definition don't talk with others so this wouldn't have any effect on them. Even if it did you would get the same result by limiting the law to Muslims.

Re: UK surveillance bill includes powers to limit end-to-end encryption

#178

Post by tomjen3 » Tue, Jul 26, 2016, 4:41 AM UTC

rm_-rf_slash wrote: post #76

hobs wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Likely no impact, because no facility on earth has the capacity to filter and find information on this scale, especially when simple techniques are employed to hide the meaning of communication. The methods needed to reduce attacks (geopolitical unrest resolved) is probably not within the capacity of the police forces we have, and even pretty good safety is so expensive no one is willing to pay for it (even if we did…

Agreed. It takes 10 minutes to find a hardware store shopping list and bomb recipe. Even then, a lot of ingredients can be purchased over time without raising any flags. Buy bleach at one store and ammonia at another, say you're cleaning if anybody asks, then find a public place to mix the two. Once someone decides to kill a lot of people, it's already too late. There is no, repeat, no way to prevent every mass murde…

You don't even need to mix anything. Gasoline can be purchased freely in any country and is deadly when poured under doors, especially those doors are blocked.

Re: UK surveillance bill includes powers to limit end-to-end encryption

#179

Post by semi-extrinsic » Tue, Jul 26, 2016, 5:12 AM UTC

TillE wrote: post #146

Blahah wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I appreciate you're playing devil's advocate, so I'm holding back. "There's a security problem in Europe at the moment". What are you talking about? The number of people harmed in terrorism-related events in Europe in any given year is dwarfed by the number of people who harm themselves by accident or stupidity in those same countries. And dwarfed to an even greater extent by the number of people killed by police in…

The recent attacks in Germany are a particularly relevant example. Aside from the fact that zero people have thus far been killed by Islamist terrorists in Germany (since...I'm not sure when), every single incident was perpetrated by one person acting entirely on his own. And the thing in Reutlingen which keeps getting lumped in was a "normal" murder. No amount of domestic "anti-terrorism" law enforcement would have…

> No amount of domestic "anti-terrorism" law enforcement would have the slightest impact on any of this, not until you crank it to the level of a genuine police state with zero freedom.

Also remember that Allied resistance in occupied Europe during WW2 was able to bomb military targets, produce submachine guns from scratch and distribute propaganda, while under heavy physical surveillance by the Nazis. Thus we know that practically any police state will not be able to stop determined fighters.

Re: UK surveillance bill includes powers to limit end-to-end encryption

#180

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Jul 26, 2016, 5:12 AM UTC

TillE wrote: post #146

Blahah wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I appreciate you're playing devil's advocate, so I'm holding back. "There's a security problem in Europe at the moment". What are you talking about? The number of people harmed in terrorism-related events in Europe in any given year is dwarfed by the number of people who harm themselves by accident or stupidity in those same countries. And dwarfed to an even greater extent by the number of people killed by police in…

The recent attacks in Germany are a particularly relevant example. Aside from the fact that zero people have thus far been killed by Islamist terrorists in Germany (since...I'm not sure when), every single incident was perpetrated by one person acting entirely on his own. And the thing in Reutlingen which keeps getting lumped in was a "normal" murder. No amount of domestic "anti-terrorism" law enforcement would have…

[deleted]