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

John McCain wants to outlaw encryption that the US government can't crack

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–196 of 196 posts

Re: John McCain wants to outlaw encryption that the US government can't crack

#191

Post by laaph »

curun1r wrote: post #118
rodgerd wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are they also aware that the exact same technology is used to protect their online banking? To protect against attacks like the Sony hack? Do they know that there is a huge segment of the economy that relies on strong encryption to do business? I'm sure they are. The problem is, I suspect, more the delusion that if there are backdoors, only MURICA will be able to exploit them because GODDAMN GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE…

> The problem is, I suspect, more the delusion that if there are backdoors, only MURICA will be able to exploit them because GODDAMN GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD! They would find the idea that there are talented individuals and groups, outside the US, who are capable of exploiting these facilities, absolutely incomprehensible. I don't think that's it at all. I think it's because they expect everything to work the wa…

> And it really was significantly harder for anyone except the government to listen in on phone conversations.

This is absolutely not true. Outside everyone's house was a box, and by hooking two wires there you could easily monitor phone calls. There was similar security every where else along the way.

When wireless (not cellular) phones became common, you could get a scanner to listen them (I'm not sure they were legal to sell listening at that frequency but they were easily modified).

The POTS was simply not secure at all.

Re: John McCain wants to outlaw encryption that the US government can't crack

#192

Post by alxndr »

delinka wrote: post #129
tolmasky wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"if you do this then I'll give you this campaign donation", is that the kind of explanation it would provide? Otherwise I don't see it getting very far.

This makes me think we need to implement a cryptographic protocol to revoke donations when politicians go back on the words that solicited the donation.

An escrow system for political donations!

Re: John McCain wants to outlaw encryption that the US government can't crack

#194

Post by stvswn »

woodman wrote: post #151
stvswn wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Indescriminately(sic) bombing?" "conducting terrorism?" I led a platoon in Iraq, and we did nothing of the sort. I'm fine with opposition to U.S. foreign policy; this is just lazy slander, and it shows a very shallow understanding of what actually happened.

> I led a platoon in Iraq, and we did nothing of the sort. I fought in Fallujah; I would be very surprised to hear from the residents that they did not feel terrorized or modify their behavior in response to our activities. I have no doubt that you don't see yourself in that light, but your intents mean very little to those people. Putting too much weight on either perspective, the action's originator or recipient, l…

You equate "they felt terrorized" with "terrorism." Terrorism is the deliberate targeting of civilians in order to cause fear for political ends. It's not "civilians being scared" and definitely not "civilians modified their behavior." I have no doubt civilians lived (and sometimes died) through horrible battles. In examining the ethics of violent conflict it absolutely does matter whether civilians were targeted or not. If you saw anyone deliberately harm civilians, or use disproportionate force against an enemy that resulted in needless civilian death, you should report it and hopefully that person goes to jail. I have no doubt some people did terrible things. That's a far, far distance from the general claim that the U.S. was "indiscriminate" or "conducted terrorism."

Re: John McCain wants to outlaw encryption that the US government can't crack

#195

Post by stvswn »

vonklaus wrote: post #163
stvswn wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Indescriminately(sic) bombing?" "conducting terrorism?" I led a platoon in Iraq, and we did nothing of the sort. I'm fine with opposition to U.S. foreign policy; this is just lazy slander, and it shows a very shallow understanding of what actually happened.

Well, I can appreciate that you conducted yourself with honor. However, here is another data point, equally as anecdotal, showing another story (wikileaks apache video). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Hx-jA2m_hY

It's not simply anecdotal about me and my conduct. It's a firm knowledge of the U.S. military's internal policies and controls.

As for that video -- I wasn't sure it's one that I had seen, so I watched it again. I don't know what point you're trying to make -- those men were completely legitimate targets. I would have killed them myself. I'm sorry you had to confront what war's actually like, but killing is sort of the whole point.

Re: John McCain wants to outlaw encryption that the US government can't crack

#196

Post by stvswn »

xenihn wrote: post #188
stvswn wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Indescriminately(sic) bombing?" "conducting terrorism?" I led a platoon in Iraq, and we did nothing of the sort. I'm fine with opposition to U.S. foreign policy; this is just lazy slander, and it shows a very shallow understanding of what actually happened.

it's really disappointing to me that you probably won't respond to woodman's post, and that you and countless others are incapable of taking even a moment to attempt overcoming your cognitive dissonance

I did reply. And I have no cognitive dissonance, just moral clarity.
Post reply on HN