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

Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain

michaelgeist.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 374 posts

Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain

#271

Post by foldr »

ben_w wrote: post #240
foldr wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can’t seriously be suggesting that a political party that most Brits haven’t even heard of has any chance of winning the next election.

"an election" (what you wrote first time) != "the next election" (what you write now). Next-but-one, perhaps. Although even for the next one, everyone's so weak I'd only put mild odds against them. I don't want them to win ever*, but failing to plan is planning to fail, and there's big money getting involved here, and the UK political system still hasn't caught up with the impact of social networks and foreign influe…

I think it goes without saying that things can change unexpectedly in the longer run, but this party simply isn’t a factor in national politics at present.

Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain

#272

Post by worldsayshi »

Meneth wrote: post #264
worldsayshi wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you. Haven't seen this problem framed in quite this way before. I find the point quite persuasive. But, I don't understand how this step could possibly work: > start policing on what opinions those people are allowed to have and what measures to take to them A much more effective counter to this would be to rebalance the information asymmetry by giving citizens the tools to coordinate against state sponsored in…

> A much more effective counter to this would be to rebalance the information asymmetry by giving citizens the tools to coordinate against state sponsored influence. Which tools, specifically? I know none.

I mean that we are in dire need of such tools!

I also am not aware of any existing tools.

Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain

#273

Post by someguyiguess »

throwawaysleep wrote: post #161
eucyclos wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been in mainland China for the past year and I wish western politicians would get it through their skulls that most of the ccp model's upsides come from CCTVs in public areas and a police force that prioritizes stopping street crime.

Eh, if you see the reaction to Flock Safety, people object to that one as well.

The problem is that those cameras aren't being put in areas where crime occurs in order to keep citizens safe. They are being put on busy streets to prevent people's ability to travel without being tracked.

Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain

#274

Post by lesuorac »

kvuj wrote: post #262
eucyclos wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not familiar with that conversation, but is the concern that it will be used to raise ticket revenue from victimless crimes without doing much to prevent the other kind?

From what I've seen, it's simply an aversion to mass scale surveillance, even in public setting. The worry being how easy it could slide into a tool used by the state for nefarious purposes (punish political dissidents, etc).

Is there actually evidence of flock being used to stop street crime? I've never heard anything about Flock (or Shotspooter) stopping street crime.

Where I am, the local speed cameras have annual documents about the street their on detailing pre-camera vehicle speeds and fatal (pedestrian) accidents and the decreases in both of them since the usage.

Afaik, the concern isn't that it "could slide" its that flock _is used_ by say Texas to monitor out of state abortions. That isn't solving street crime and certainly didn't benefit the local residents.

Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain

#275

Post by frig57 »

eucyclos wrote: post #191
throwawaysleep wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh, if you see the reaction to Flock Safety, people object to that one as well.

Not familiar with that conversation, but is the concern that it will be used to raise ticket revenue from victimless crimes without doing much to prevent the other kind?

The concern is losing all your freedom and privacy for no good reason

Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain

#276

Post by frig57 »

augment_me wrote: post #195
r2vcap wrote: post #142

It feels like many democratic leaders are starting to think the CCP model—mass surveillance of citizens—is the right direction, with growing demands for chat control, facial verification, age verification, and more. Fxxk any politician who thinks they are above the citizens in a democracy.

I believe that's it's sadly a necessity for control of the population when you have other superpowers employing this. If you are Europe, and you have democratic elections, you have an informational power asymmetry towards the states that have mass surveillance and control. You are (as we saw last year with the Romanian election that was swung to 60% in 2 weeks over TikTok) susceptible towards influence of other super…

Your last paragraph spunds misguided

Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain

#277

Post by canadiantim »

r2vcap wrote: post #142

It feels like many democratic leaders are starting to think the CCP model—mass surveillance of citizens—is the right direction, with growing demands for chat control, facial verification, age verification, and more. Fxxk any politician who thinks they are above the citizens in a democracy.

Canadian leaders are currently very consciously choosing to partner with China as opposed to the U.S.

I get diversification, that’s a good call, but adopting policies that actively harm Canada to the benefit of China is where we’re at and it’s so far beyond the pale. Just take a look at Canada, who for as long as I have known, have tried to maintain its industrial base in Ontario, eg the cross-border supply chain for automobiles, but then this "new" government comes in and is like y’know what we really need right now? To compound the effects of tariffs, piss off our biggest trading partner, risk NAFTA (CUSMA) and our entire cross-border supply chains with the US all so we can get some cheap electric cars from China, which won't even be manufactured here (atleast not with Canadian jobs); meanwhile we just spent close to $100 billion in subsidies explicitly to try and kickstart electric vehicle manufacturing in Canada. May have been more productive to turn that $100 billion into pennies and throw them down a wishing well...

Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain

#278

Post by jamincan »

bluegatty wrote: post #150
ghssds wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On paper, there is no Canadian PM. The Constitution reads: "The Executive Government and Authority of and over Canada is hereby declared to continue and be vested in the Queen." The existence of a Prime Minister and the fact executive powers are delegated to them are customary. A Trump-like actor in Canada would do far less damage than in USA. There is no position they could held that would give them the power to do…

"are one motion from the House of Common from being overthrown." - so this is a form of political constraint, which we can see in the US doesn't work very well if the ruling party wants to ignore concerns and acts at the behest of the Executive. If the PM holds enough popular support and has even a narrow majority that he can effectively whip, he's almost above reproach. Everything at the top in Canada is 'convention…

I think one major difference is that MPs are far less beholden to their party for reelection and it is not uncommon for them to cross the floor when they feel the interests of their constituents are not being represented by the governing (or opposing) party.

Yes, a PM with a whipped majority is tremendously powerful, but getting that whipped majority is not an easy task and requires significant politicking and negotiating within the party precisely because individual MPs are proportionately more powerful than legislators in the US.

Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain

#279

Post by someguyiguess »

everdrive wrote: post #231

We're in a very low trust and illiberal era. Everyone is convinced that the other side is evil and cannot be trusted, and they are building to laws and infrastructure to contain the perceived threat. And no one imagines that infrastructure will be used against them.

> "Everyone is convinced that the other side is evil and cannot be trusted..."

And the scary part is that they're both apparently correct.

Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain

#280

Post by unsupp0rted »

16mb wrote: post #267
unsupp0rted wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just don't back those organizations too publicly or too loudly if you don't want your bank account summarily frozen

Do you have a source of people’s bank being frozen for backing those orgs?

"I'll grant that dozens were imprisoned for protesting on a Tuesday, but do you have a source proving that anybody was imprisoned for protesting on a Wednesday?"
Post reply on HN