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

The Next Front in the New Crypto Wars: WhatsApp

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 215 posts

Re: The Next Front in the New Crypto Wars: WhatsApp

#41

Post by [deleted] »

danieltillett wrote: post #23
yazaddaruvala wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anyone have any insights into why the commonly used guns argument is not good enough for encryption? If we ban guns(encryption), only the criminals will have it. The only thing I can think of is that the majority of people who advocate for encryption are anti-gun, and don't want to give strength to that argument?

I have never understood why the USA anti-gun lobby doesn't go after ammunition rather than guns. Just ban ammunition and a gun just becomes a not so dangerous club.

[deleted]

Re: The Next Front in the New Crypto Wars: WhatsApp

#42

Post by fiatmoney »

danieltillett wrote: post #23
yazaddaruvala wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anyone have any insights into why the commonly used guns argument is not good enough for encryption? If we ban guns(encryption), only the criminals will have it. The only thing I can think of is that the majority of people who advocate for encryption are anti-gun, and don't want to give strength to that argument?

I have never understood why the USA anti-gun lobby doesn't go after ammunition rather than guns. Just ban ammunition and a gun just becomes a not so dangerous club.

Doing so would be a good way to start a civil war.

Re: The Next Front in the New Crypto Wars: WhatsApp

#43

Post by krapp »

danieltillett wrote: post #40
15155 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah yes, "Let's use semantics to infringe on unalienable rights, that'll show those Framers!"

Well unless the anti-gun lobby can change the constitution they need to find some way around it. I was not suggesting that this should be done, just asking why not?

The right to "keep and bear arms" pretty clearly implies the right to use arms (guns) in the way they were intended to be used, which means access to the ammunition as well. No one in their right mind believes the Second Amendment was written with the idea that militiamen would use their guns primarily as clubs.

It's not done partly because the "anti-gun lobby" knows it would be a fruitless endeavor, and partly because most gun control advocates don't actually want to render guns useless by any means possible.

Re: The Next Front in the New Crypto Wars: WhatsApp

#44

Post by schoen »

steve19 wrote: post #26
newjersey wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, my perception of the gun lobby is that a big part of the effort is centralized. At least that's my impression after reading the nytimes article. I don't have any insight into the gun lobby so I can't tell whether it is any accurate. http://nytimes.com/2014/01/05/business/media/banished-for-qu... I fear the gun argument is further weakened by the fact that civilians can't have big anti-aircraft guns in their bac…

Your perception is wrong. The gun lobby is crazyily grassroots. The NRA is demonized, but their spending in lobbying is low (their income is relatively low and they have a lot of other elements such as training and certification) and less than the gun control lobby since Bloomberg (and some silicon Valley VCs) began to lobby. There is only one reason the NRA has influence: members and sympathizers will vote on thier…

> Lobby groups like the eff need more members and crucially need members to vote for who they recommend

EFF is a 501(c)(3) organization and is forbidden to endorse or oppose political candidates. That is different from NRA.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Rifle_Association#Org...

Re: The Next Front in the New Crypto Wars: WhatsApp

#45

Post by awqrre »

shmerl wrote: post #33
jessegreathouse wrote: post #5

If the government wins any of these court battles, it's only a matter of time until one-way encryption is outlawed. It follows logically that if criminals/terrorists can't use iPhones to securely communicate, then they'll just move on to the next convenient encryption app. The government will continue to order companies to break their one-way encryption until the government realizes they're playing musical chairs and…

It won't be outlawed as long as public will be against it. It will be a political suicide for opponents of encryption. But only if public will be against it. Time will tell.

Obama might outlaw it on his way out...

Re: The Next Front in the New Crypto Wars: WhatsApp

#46

Post by shmerl »

awqrre wrote: post #45
shmerl wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It won't be outlawed as long as public will be against it. It will be a political suicide for opponents of encryption. But only if public will be against it. Time will tell.

Obama might outlaw it on his way out...

What would be the point for him to make a mess on his way out? Just to be nasty?

Re: The Next Front in the New Crypto Wars: WhatsApp

#47

Post by steve19 »

schoen wrote: post #44
steve19 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your perception is wrong. The gun lobby is crazyily grassroots. The NRA is demonized, but their spending in lobbying is low (their income is relatively low and they have a lot of other elements such as training and certification) and less than the gun control lobby since Bloomberg (and some silicon Valley VCs) began to lobby. There is only one reason the NRA has influence: members and sympathizers will vote on thier…

> Lobby groups like the eff need more members and crucially need members to vote for who they recommend EFF is a 501(c)(3) organization and is forbidden to endorse or oppose political candidates. That is different from NRA. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Rifle_Association#Org...

They could easily spin off an entity to handle that, like the NRA does with NRA-IL. Maybe they should, or maybe another group should.

The federal government once classified encryption as a weapon, maybe we have 2nd amendments rights to it.

Re: The Next Front in the New Crypto Wars: WhatsApp

#48

Post by danieltillett »

krapp wrote: post #43
danieltillett wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well unless the anti-gun lobby can change the constitution they need to find some way around it. I was not suggesting that this should be done, just asking why not?

The right to "keep and bear arms" pretty clearly implies the right to use arms (guns) in the way they were intended to be used, which means access to the ammunition as well. No one in their right mind believes the Second Amendment was written with the idea that militiamen would use their guns primarily as clubs. It's not done partly because the "anti-gun lobby" knows it would be a fruitless endeavor, and partly becau…

I was under the impression that certain types of ammunition are able to be banned without any constitutional issues arising [1].

If you wanted to be really clever you could still allow ammunition, but limit the materials the bullet could be made from or limit the powder load. Attacking ammunition has got to be a more workable strategy than trying to restrict gun ownership without consitutional change.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teflon-coated_bullet

Re: The Next Front in the New Crypto Wars: WhatsApp

#49

Post by danieltillett »

fiatmoney wrote: post #42
danieltillett wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have never understood why the USA anti-gun lobby doesn't go after ammunition rather than guns. Just ban ammunition and a gun just becomes a not so dangerous club.

Doing so would be a good way to start a civil war.

Yes, but one fought with clubs not bullets :)
Post reply on HN