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

Mozilla to UK regulators: VPNs are essential privacy and security tools

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–386 of 386 posts

Re: Mozilla to UK regulators: VPNs are essential privacy and security tools

#381

Post by tardedmeme »

antirealist wrote: post #378
tardedmeme wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The categorical imperative should be used here. "Arrest people I don't like" fails the categorical imperative. However, "check things that destroy society and make everyone worse off except for a select few if left unchecked" easily passes the bar. Nothing is absolute. There is a spectrum without an obvious optimal point. The recent neonazi rally in the UK did a lot of damage that could have easily been prevented. Wh…

So I agree that "check things that destroy society and make everyone worse off except for a select few if left unchecked" might indeed pass as a valid categorical imperitive. Putting aside the slew of problems with Kantianism, the main issue here is one of epistemology. You think social media is destroying society. Some people think a departure from traditional family values is destroying society. You might be pretty…

> I'd argue it's better we all just agree these questions are ambiguous and should in principle be outside of the power of the state to mediate

Murder is legal, then, and there's no point having a state at all.

Re: Mozilla to UK regulators: VPNs are essential privacy and security tools

#382

Post by Forgeties79 »

none2585 wrote: post #277
Forgeties79 wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Parents are expected to do more than you can imagine and everyone has an opinion on how they’re supposed to do it, especially in the US. You’re a terrible parent if you can’t keep a 5 year old from ever alerting somebody to their presence, but you’re also a terrible parent if you give them an iPad for a few minutes so they don’t bother people. This whole thing where parents are expected to do it all themselves is act…

Why should I be responsible for raising someone else's children or give a shit if they see porn? Who cares. Sounds like you made a decision you regret and expect everyone else to bend their life around you. It is selfish to assume others will take care of your shitty kids.

Wow

Re: Mozilla to UK regulators: VPNs are essential privacy and security tools

#383

Post by raxxorraxor »

tardedmeme wrote: post #331
antirealist wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wholeheartedly disagree. When we consider a policy, it's not enough that the narrow outcome is good . What also matters are the broad outcomes and whether or not the policy is principled. We presumably all hate Alex Jones. Does that mean the goverment saying "Alex Jones is banned from communicating publically" is good policy? Even if we agree the direct outcome is good (which I do), the principle of "the governemen…

The categorical imperative should be used here. "Arrest people I don't like" fails the categorical imperative. However, "check things that destroy society and make everyone worse off except for a select few if left unchecked" easily passes the bar. Nothing is absolute. There is a spectrum without an obvious optimal point. The recent neonazi rally in the UK did a lot of damage that could have easily been prevented. Wh…

With that position you would have made an excellent bishop or mufti in the 19th century. But today your position needs justification and you will probably not be able to convince a democratic majority to do away with hard earned and liked freedoms.

Re: Mozilla to UK regulators: VPNs are essential privacy and security tools

#384

Post by antirealist »

tardedmeme wrote: post #381
antirealist wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So I agree that "check things that destroy society and make everyone worse off except for a select few if left unchecked" might indeed pass as a valid categorical imperitive. Putting aside the slew of problems with Kantianism, the main issue here is one of epistemology. You think social media is destroying society. Some people think a departure from traditional family values is destroying society. You might be pretty…

> I'd argue it's better we all just agree these questions are ambiguous and should in principle be outside of the power of the state to mediate Murder is legal, then, and there's no point having a state at all.

Murder is directly and non-consentually harming another person. Having a traditional family or using social media are choices you can, in our current world, make or not make for yourself. That's an important - and I think pretty philosophically clear - distinction.

And FWIW if the killing was consensual (i.e. euthenasia) then I think it should be legal.

Re: Mozilla to UK regulators: VPNs are essential privacy and security tools

#385

Post by ropable »

onion2k wrote: post #311
ropable wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You say that like it's a bad thing. Not everyone thinks so.

Some people think it'd be reasonable to have every car reporting it's GPS position and speed to the government to stop people speeding, or to have facial recognition cameras on ever corner to catch criminals, or to make everyone carry an ID card that people can demand to see. On the face of it living in a police state is safe, and secure, and actually increases your freedom to just live your life without pain. And if…

Nice straw man! Be a shame if it was a logical fallacy.

Re: Mozilla to UK regulators: VPNs are essential privacy and security tools

#386

Post by therealpygon »

Saline9515 wrote: post #346
therealpygon wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

love that not having kids when you can’t actually afford your own existence at that time is a hot take that no one could know in advance that they shouldn’t do. Also love that I SPECIFICALLY called out your argument, almost like you couldn’t even finish reading before needing to get in your super well thought response. That’s sarcasm, figured I’d make sure it was clear since the reading thing is up in the air.

I think that you should try to have kids (plural) before trying to make grand and contemptuous theories about parents.

Ah yes, the old “you can’t have an opinion if you aren’t a parent” argument. How quaint.
Post reply on HN