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

VPNs are not the solution to a policy problem

asininetech.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–228 of 228 posts

Re: VPNs are not the solution to a policy problem

#221

Post by dredmorbius »

lucideer wrote: post #216
dredmorbius wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Re your final sentence, there's a possible third option (though your second has merits): coming up with both rules (law) and guidance (rights, ethics, morality) based on what improves the overall common weal. Another archaic concept, I fear, most days.

I guess I was conflating the latter two... In my mind: ethics = definition of what improves the common weal law (should)= enforcement of said ethics

Hrm. I'm wondering now if there's a possible ethical case for actions which don't improve the common weal. Or how to resolve conflicts between short-term present vs. long-term future outcomes, or other conflicts -- say, you classic Trolley Problem.

I also wanted to note that your dismissal of Fundamental Rights is a good point. I'm finding far more agreement with the Pragmatists (Dewey, James, etc.) than various Natural / Fundamental Rightists. If only because any idiot can jump up and claim "This is My Fundamental Right" and ... all rational discussion stops.

Re: VPNs are not the solution to a policy problem

#222

Post by dfc »

dredmorbius wrote: post #220
dfc wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. I never said that "code replaces statutory law." I said it was strange to see the evolution from one extreme where code trumps law to the other extreme where technology can't solve policy problems. Lessig was mentioned in between those two extremes.

I won't tell you what you meant as you're the leading authority on that. However, what you wrote was "A little later we had Lessig saying 'code is law.'", and, if you'll allow, a reasonable interpretation of that is "code replaces law". If you meant to convey a different meaning, you might have clarified. I stand by my statement that that appears to misrepresent Lessig's argument, which is a good one. As for the rang…

Prof. Lessig said "code is law" I was just quoting him. Moreover "code replaces law" is an entirely unreasonable interpretation on its face and especially if you consider I said watch the evolution from A to B to C.

I guess I will just have to live with your disappointment.

Re: VPNs are not the solution to a policy problem

#223

Post by Proof »

I swear this 98 percent of this article was from the Policy Change HN read yesterday.

I think the market for VPNs that have a policy for not keeping logs and easy-to-use will grow exponentially in the common days or weeks. For the more technically inclined, VPS providers.

Re: VPNs are not the solution to a policy problem

#224

Post by dfc »

dredmorbius wrote: post #220
dfc wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. I never said that "code replaces statutory law." I said it was strange to see the evolution from one extreme where code trumps law to the other extreme where technology can't solve policy problems. Lessig was mentioned in between those two extremes.

I won't tell you what you meant as you're the leading authority on that. However, what you wrote was "A little later we had Lessig saying 'code is law.'", and, if you'll allow, a reasonable interpretation of that is "code replaces law". If you meant to convey a different meaning, you might have clarified. I stand by my statement that that appears to misrepresent Lessig's argument, which is a good one. As for the rang…

It occurred to me that "x is law" (and the variants "y is bad law" "z is good law") might be specific to American English?

Re: VPNs are not the solution to a policy problem

#225

Post by Icedcool »

chrisper wrote: post #124
manquer wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can setup your own on digital ocean or aws light sail you will get better bandwidth... IP will not be blocked as it will not be known vpn IP and it can be rotated.. not saying these are solutions to the privacy problem only the technical ones

Digital ocean is blocked by Netflix . At least when I used it with my VPN.

Wow... this is astounding.

Re: VPNs are not the solution to a policy problem

#226

Post by Bartweiss »

dredmorbius wrote: post #217
Bartweiss wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All fair points, though I specifically had individual defense in mind. I don't know any good way for an individual to restrain accurate data once it's released, so poisoning is the only option I see to dilute the value of it. At least when thinking about individual defenses, I tend to treat the regulatory landscape as a lost cause - currently I'm just hoping that privacy tools won't be actively outlawed.

Information-related activities have far more in common with epidemiology -- and at all kinds of levels -- than pretty much anything else. Whether it's concern of your data going out, or bad genetics patterns coming in, your best bet is to cut off the routes of transmission . In a plague-infested land, it's practicing exceedingly good hygiene which is in your best interest. If that means walling yourself off from the…

> (Though you've also got me thinking about what equivalents to own information spreading out there are, epidemiologically.)

This seems like a really good question, actually. The disease model of information is quite effective, at least in terms of ideas like herd immunity, transmission rates, quarantine, etc.

But at the "patient zero" level it's quite strange, with personal information being a thing you know you have and don't want to spread unintentionally. It definitely changes some things compared to the standard model, though I think you have a point that you can invert things fairly effectively (i.e. 'hygeine' is to avoid spreading info, instead of contracting it).

I also wish there was more good writing on information hazards, which follow the epidemiology model almost precisely. So much of what's out there descends into Cthulu references or 'fake news' rants, rather than looking at the actual metaphors for things like "herd immunity".

(Surely someone has written an ironic essay about "vaccinating against anti-vax ideas"?)

Re: VPNs are not the solution to a policy problem

#227

Post by dredmorbius »

Bartweiss wrote: post #226
dredmorbius wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Information-related activities have far more in common with epidemiology -- and at all kinds of levels -- than pretty much anything else. Whether it's concern of your data going out, or bad genetics patterns coming in, your best bet is to cut off the routes of transmission . In a plague-infested land, it's practicing exceedingly good hygiene which is in your best interest. If that means walling yourself off from the…

> (Though you've also got me thinking about what equivalents to own information spreading out there are, epidemiologically.) This seems like a really good question, actually. The disease model of information is quite effective, at least in terms of ideas like herd immunity, transmission rates, quarantine, etc. But at the "patient zero" level it's quite strange, with personal information being a thing you know you hav…

There is some public-health treatment of information spreading, though not a whole lot of it. I've been the source of some, though the ideas pre-date me considerably. You could go back to religious contexts, the concepts of apostasy and blasphemy, or even (per I.F. Stone) the Trial of Socrates, for prior art.

For information specifically, it's interesting in that there are at least three possible goals:

1. Restricting or combatting the spread of toxic information.

2. Encouraging the spread of useful or helpful information. There's a great deal of this under the rhubric of "diffusion of information".

3. Limiting, for socially beneficial or malevolent purposes, the spread of generally private information.

The first two instances have clear epidemiological and evolutionary cognates: limiting the spread of disease or disease agents (bacteria, viruses, prions, contaminants), or the process of evolutionary advance or propogation of fitness adaptations.

The question of concealment ... thinking through here, I'm coming up with concepts such as camoflage, mimickry, colour or shape-shifting (e.g., cuttlefish, octopus). There are bacteria and viruses which evolve or mutate rapidly making various antibodies or antibiotics less effective quickly (another element taken up by fake-news and propaganda sites -- one article I was reading yesterday noted how new most such outlets were, earlier pieces I've seen noted how new sites were emerging late in 2016 and growing to million+ daily user). I need to think more about that.

As for the antivax situation, I've pointed out that information campaigns to refute anti-vax ideas regarding the efficacy (and safety) of vaccines against viruses which attack DNA/RNA, are an information attack on an information attack on an information attack on an information attack on information.

https://ello.co/dredmorbius/post/manw8sighyj2in4661tyla

Re: VPNs are not the solution to a policy problem

#228

Post by igk »

arca_vorago wrote: post #179
igk wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The second school of thought is individual responsibility. Users should take steps to protect their own privacy on a case-by-case basis, in the same way they look after their own home security or personal safety. I think this is a bullshit argument. Nobody looks after their home security or personal security the way we expect users to be careful of their privacy, nor do we accept the amount of intrusions into our h…

> We have police, laws, community rules, all of these things to protect our houses and personal security. If you leave the door unlocked, robbing it is still a crime. Likewise, if you walk around on an unsafe neighbourhood and get robbed, it would be ludicrous to hear "well, the city warned you that part is unsafe, so the police isn't going to investigate" The irony of this statement is that this actually happens qui…

This might be very cultural thing(I'm from Europe). But unless you want to live in a society dominated by warlords and gangs, laws and society is the better way imo. Again my opinion, but for me the gun defense is a myth perpetuated in the US for ideological reasons. Keep your guns,but they won't keep you safe against a gang which will just shiv you at night, or simply outgun you. The reason all civilisations of a certain density have centralised law enforcement is it's simply inefficient for everyone to defend themselves (think narco states: sure, you can hire a guard, but your neighbour also has to hire one. If you try to start a neighbourhood guard cooperation then you are one step towards government and police)

And coming from Europe, we create new rights all the time

Post reply on HN