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

Americans' Access to Strong Encryption Is at Risk, an Open Letter to Congress

rietta.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 139 posts

Re: Americans' Access to Strong Encryption Is at Risk, an Open Letter to Congress

#51

Post by rietta »

azinman2 wrote: post #47
fiatpandas wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You make fun of someone for stating their credentials but you do the same in your profile. I guess your joke is that his credentials are laughable compared to the credentials of other people (e.g. MIT grads). Or is the joke that he stated it so clearly so early in the letter? I'm not sure.

It's mentioned in the first few sentences and 2 more times in the same page. My HN "bio" isn't a blog post. I dont start my communication that way.

Deploying to remove the first reference. I see your point.

Re: Americans' Access to Strong Encryption Is at Risk, an Open Letter to Congress

#52

Post by xapata »

azinman2 wrote: post #49
xapata wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It looks like you forgot to pay your Squarespace bill: "This account has expired. ( http://empiric.al )" Joking aside, I guess you're saying that leading with credentials in an article is unnecessary if that article is relatively short and you've got a bio blurb at the bottom of the page?

It's not just the bio blurb, but the credentials beneath the conclusion, and the beginning of the article as well. Empirical is no more, we're at ginger.io now. Haven't bothered updating various bits.

You could have made that criticism in a more kind tone. As a researcher on interacting with strangers on the internet, I'd expect you to be more cautious that your comments aren't accidentally read in a negative light.

Re: Americans' Access to Strong Encryption Is at Risk, an Open Letter to Congress

#53

Post by rietta »

azinman2 wrote: post #50
fjert wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the significance of his masters being from Georgia Tech?

You tell me? It's mentioned 3 times on that page.

I've updated the page to remove the references except for in the bio. I got tripped up with the open letter format as a blog post when I had written most of it previously for private email use. I do appreciate the feedback and hopefully this revision will make it stronger when members of Congress do read it. As for the significance, it's the relevant degree that I have to the content of the letter.

Re: Americans' Access to Strong Encryption Is at Risk, an Open Letter to Congress

#55

Post by azinman2 »

rietta wrote: post #53
azinman2 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You tell me? It's mentioned 3 times on that page.

I've updated the page to remove the references except for in the bio. I got tripped up with the open letter format as a blog post when I had written most of it previously for private email use. I do appreciate the feedback and hopefully this revision will make it stronger when members of Congress do read it. As for the significance, it's the relevant degree that I have to the content of the letter.

I'm not trying to cast doubt on your credibility. The content speaks for itself. It was just funny to me to see it listed so many times and have it open that way.

Re: Americans' Access to Strong Encryption Is at Risk, an Open Letter to Congress

#56

Post by azinman2 »

xapata wrote: post #52
azinman2 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not just the bio blurb, but the credentials beneath the conclusion, and the beginning of the article as well. Empirical is no more, we're at ginger.io now. Haven't bothered updating various bits.

You could have made that criticism in a more kind tone. As a researcher on interacting with strangers on the internet, I'd expect you to be more cautious that your comments aren't accidentally read in a negative light.

I figured the joke would be obvious to anyone read the article.... wasn't meant to be negative or mean.

Re: Americans' Access to Strong Encryption Is at Risk, an Open Letter to Congress

#57

Post by joering2 »

xupybd wrote: post #21

Just think of the outrage if the government required master keys to everyone's homes? I know there is a difference, but it's not a huge leap to compare the two. We don't want the government to have such easy access to our homes because we can't trust every government employee not to abuse it. I think the same goes here. No mater what safe guards you put in place it's a scary thought that you simply can't keep the gov…

I think its not a correct comparison.

The reason government doesn't have or need keys to every house, because no matter how many lock you put on your door, government (SWAT team, for example) can break in anyways, if deem necessary.

So for this reason alone if they truly want to... every house can be and will be open to them, no matter what.

Meanwhile here the locks are based on sophisticated math.. and that math is smarter or more complicated than the largest compute power they can get hold of.. hence make your virtual locks unbreakable. I think that's the whole issue they have here.

Re: Americans' Access to Strong Encryption Is at Risk, an Open Letter to Congress

#58

Post by pinaceae »

As if they'd give a shit.

Right now they want to un-insure 24mil people, re-introduce the whole pre-existing condition scam.

you really think a ruling class that has no qualms being "pro-life" while denying young mothers healthcare will care about your nerd bullshit?

Re: Americans' Access to Strong Encryption Is at Risk, an Open Letter to Congress

#59

Post by sanderjd »

xupybd wrote: post #21

Just think of the outrage if the government required master keys to everyone's homes? I know there is a difference, but it's not a huge leap to compare the two. We don't want the government to have such easy access to our homes because we can't trust every government employee not to abuse it. I think the same goes here. No mater what safe guards you put in place it's a scary thought that you simply can't keep the gov…

Disclaimer: I agree with you but I always struggle to convince people that this line of reasoning makes sense.

The government can already enter anybody's home upon receiving a warrant to do so. If you don't let them in, they can bust through a door or tear down a wall. We trust the government not to do this without court oversight. We trust courts to provide good and honest oversight. It is far from a perfect system, but we set up lots of human-level checks and balances to keep power distributed enough that this basically works.

The problem with strong encryption is that this is impossible. Even if there is a very good reason signed off by an honest court, it is impossible to get in. This breaks that human-level checks-and-balances system. What replaces it?

Re: Americans' Access to Strong Encryption Is at Risk, an Open Letter to Congress

#60

Post by WalterBright »

It isn't just our privacy at issue. With more and more critical infrastructure on the internet, having unbreakable encryption is a major national economic and national security requirement.

It's unrealistic to think that if there is a means for access by the government, that foreign enemies and criminal organizations won't be able to access it, too, and cause havoc.

Post reply on HN