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

France looking at banning Tor, blocking public Wi-Fi

arstechnica.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 273 posts

Re: France looking at banning Tor, blocking public Wi-Fi

#181

Post by ikeboy »

icebraining wrote: post #142
ikeboy wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that would be a great idea as soon as autonomous cars are available for purchase.

I'd bet even autonomous cars will kill more per year than terrorist attacks.

If we use global numbers, probably not.

>In 2014, 32,685 people were killed in terrorist attacks. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-17/global-terrorism-index...

The WHO puts global road traffic deaths at around 1 million, so if autonomous cars reduces that by a factor of 50, which seems likely, they'd kill less than terrorism.

Re: France looking at banning Tor, blocking public Wi-Fi

#182

Post by sitkack »

GrumpyBen wrote: post #131
stefantalpalaru wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you read French? https://wiki.laquadrature.net/%C3%89tat_urgence/Recensement#... People who commit crimes should be fined or arrested. These are preventive house arrests for crimes that they might commit in the future. You really don't see the problem with this?

They also banned alcohol sales at night in some places for the same simple reason: the police has better things to do right now than dealing with drunk people or anarchists

You didn't respond to the question.

Re: France looking at banning Tor, blocking public Wi-Fi

#183

Post by r00fus »

Mikeb85 wrote: post #170
cryoshon wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On one hand, it's unquestionable that radical Islam is an aggressor that is funding and directing terror attacks. On the other hand, Muslims are people too, and it is extremely unjust to punish all Muslims for the actions of a radical sect. I think that Europe is in danger of lurching rightward and tempting the return of ethno-religious cleansing. Fascism is not pretty, and the danger for Europeans is real.

Unfortunately, the ugly truth is that communal punishment is the only form of punishment that truly works. Right now, Muslims won't turn in their neighbors and children to the authorities if they're radicalized. It's only when they're more afraid of the consequences of not turning them in that extremism will finally begin to be purged from their communities. As long as Muslims say "they're not REAL Muslims" and absol…

On the gripping hand... what if ISIS is completely a western-security-state construction (yes, warning: CT ahead)?

The authorities control all the discussion, they sift through (or plant) the evidence, and it's possible that the ISIS was indirectly funded directly from large western governments.

ISIS is the perfect Emmanuel Goldstein.

Re: France looking at banning Tor, blocking public Wi-Fi

#184

Post by Mikeb85 »

IkmoIkmo wrote: post #179
Mikeb85 wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, the ugly truth is that communal punishment is the only form of punishment that truly works. Right now, Muslims won't turn in their neighbors and children to the authorities if they're radicalized. It's only when they're more afraid of the consequences of not turning them in that extremism will finally begin to be purged from their communities. As long as Muslims say "they're not REAL Muslims" and absol…

Eh, could you hold that thought for a moment? We're busy with our collective punishment programme of Christians, they should've stopped Breivik because hey, all Christians exchange terrorist plans and knew it was coming but they didn't warn the police! The only way we can convince them to warn the police next time is to punish them collectively this time, these Christians just don't care otherwise... Can you see how…

First of all, Breivik himself stated he's not a Christian, claiming allegiance to Odin.

Second, if someone knew of his plans and didn't turn him in, they're guilty of complicity under current laws in most western countries.

Third, far-right groups are regularly 'punished' (ie. Prosecuted under various laws) for the actions of their members, even if it doesn't comprise all their members. As are gang members, etc...

Harboring, aiding and abetting criminals is punished in our society as a crime. Why not aiding and abetting extremism?

Re: France looking at banning Tor, blocking public Wi-Fi

#185

Post by vegabook »

gotchange wrote: post #166
GrumpyBen wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The police found more than 300 illegal weapons during their searches. People that were put under house arrests have a file on them because of their links with terrorists or terrorist organizations. I don't feel the government is abusing the state of emergency, I just feel they should have done all this before the attacks.

Hey people, I have a file on GrumpyBen, can someone please lock him up as he is deemed a threat to public safety? Joking aside, if activists committed any crime, you follow the legal procedures and challenge them in a court of law before a judge and let the defendants present their case in a free trial and see if any of the charges you brought against them sticks, otherwise shut up and leave them alone because if you…

I don't find your "joke" very funny at all, in the aftermath of almost 200 terrorist deaths (in the west) in November alone. GrumpyBen's prescription is not fun and anti-liberty, but so is living in a society being preyed upon by violent groups within it.

Re: France looking at banning Tor, blocking public Wi-Fi

#186

Post by Cyph0n »

aikah wrote: post #167
clarkmoody wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Granted, I have taken the quote out of context. But so do religious fanatics. You can't hand-wave this sort of thing away, since anyone can make the Bible say anything they want by selectively quoting it. You are doing more harm than good here. The Old Testament law was set up to create a theocracy. Many infractions of the law were punishable by death. Contrast that to Jesus' teaching: "You have heard that it was s…

> But of course, you'll need to understand the context in which Jesus is teaching to understand all of what he's saying in Matthew 5 and during his whole ministry. The problem right here : context. If the teachings of the Bible (or the Quran) are bound to a specific context then they shouldn't be worshiped like some universal and perfect teachings. Following these teachings then means following moral values that were…

I think your issue is quite deeper than that. Even if God revealed Himself to all humanity or more than one person, there would still be disbelievers. Humans were created that way, and God knows that obviously. We are inherently obtuse creatures when it comes to belief.

How many people should God reveal Himself to in order for others to believe in His existence? 2? 10? 10000? Would people still believe that revelation 100 years later? 1000 years later? How would the revelation take place? God just appears in the sky? Or personally to every human?

Keep in mind that exposure to a supernatural being is a difficult thing to handle for our tiny brains. Or perhaps it flies over our heads, like when you stand among a group of ants.

You might say why doesn't God just appear regularly? That would defeat the purpose of belief. It would be too easy then. Furthermore, I'd wager that we would not have developed as a species. Why try to understand the orbits of the planets when God will just appear in a few weeks? Is there a point anymore?

I guess my point is that the "why personal revelation" argument is a tough nut to crack. If you believe in God, then the answer is simply God knows more. If not, you might need to approach the issue in a more rational manner, instead of just scratch the surface and then dismiss religion entirely.

Re: France looking at banning Tor, blocking public Wi-Fi

#187

Post by slang800 »

GrumpyBen wrote: post #141
metanoetic wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet, they're still not ISIS terrorists. The state of emergency was used to stop public discourse and dissent - both anarchists and non-anarchists were banned from attending marches during the Paris climate summit.

The police had to protect the COP21 and the visit from more than 150 head of states. They also have to protect administrations, newspaper offices, jewish organizations and others potential terrorist targets. There's just not enough police forces to handle all this, plus marches and anarchist protests

Not having proper resources isn't a reason to infringe upon the freedoms of the people. If the police can't handle their work, then they should just ignore less important crimes and focus their efforts on the stuff that matters. Otherwise the French government could use a lack of resources as an excuse to silence whoever they want. With a justification like that, they could make arrests for thought-crime.

Re: France looking at banning Tor, blocking public Wi-Fi

#188

Post by PhaseMage »

azurelogic wrote: post #32

What is more ridiculous is that shared public wifi would become critical in the event of a major terror attack (on scale with 9/11). We have already seen the use of social media to allow families and friends to connect after a disaster occurs. Given the fragility of mobile data networks under heavy load, public wifi could become the only option for mass communications. The French government will only be handicapping…

I think we need a mesh topology at the network layer in order to really have reliable networks in an emergency. TCP/IP, in my opinion, is an engine that centralizes power: Which leads to choke points and single points of failure for critical systems. This is especially true for most end nodes: I'm out of luck if Comcast goes down.

Re: France looking at banning Tor, blocking public Wi-Fi

#189

Post by mindslight »

jacquesm wrote: post #174
mindslight wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is the distinction between conspiracy and symbiosis really that significant?

That's food for thought. Gut feeling: yes, ability to articulate: none. So I could be wrong on that because I have no data to support it. At a minimum it implies a harder problem to do a roll-back (if conspiracy were detected a roll-back would be easier). So I do think there are differences that are significant.

If one believes in democratic change, then I suppose that yes, exposing the conspiracy would cause it to be eradicated. So in effect, characterizing something as a conspiracy is perhaps taking an easy way out. Less easy than the simplistic "us vs them" narrative, but a shortcut nonetheless.

I'm just sympathetic to the viewpoint because it feels as if it is at least coming from the right place, especially as the damage from the attack is purposely amplified by the government organ of mainstream media.

Re: France looking at banning Tor, blocking public Wi-Fi

#190

Post by jacquesm »

Lawtonfogle wrote: post #120
jacquesm wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't subscribe to that view. There is enough misery in the world that you can always find a suitable event without having to concoct your own. All it takes is the press to magnify an event out of proportion and voila: instant crisis.

There is enough evidence that, while not directly performing attacks, they have considered doing such and engage in behaviors that encourage such attacks. For example, look at the FBI radicalizing individuals and convince them to carry out attacks. Even though the FBI works to make the actual attack a fake, they have created a dangerous individual who may switch to carrying out an attack. And this isn't even consider…

That's entrapment, bad enough in and of itself but not the same as a conspiracy. Entrapment is a very dangerous strategy for many reasons.
Post reply on HN