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

EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

statewatch.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

741–750 of 780 posts

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#741

Post by agensaequivocum »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #554
jordanbeiber wrote: post #544

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact so many people feel they need a gun for safety is the first and biggest issue IMO. This is fueled by movies and culture - have the gun in your possession and you’ll automatically win the fight - that was easy! I’ve read countless comments from Americans that they have a gun to shoot intruders. Statistics telling you there’s a bigger chance someone else will get hurt be damned. These ideas are have to be fuel…

It's the wild west mentality that the US never grew out of. Can't blame them either, given the apparent incompetence of the police. It's an issue that won't be solved by banning weapons. Educating people (e.g. mandatory background checks, operation and safety training, and safe storage) and solving the underlying problems will work. I mean a lot cite defense from home invasions as the reason to own a gun. Why do peop…

> mandatory background checks,

This is only effective with a gun registry which gun owners will not accept.

> operation and safety training

Are you required to take civics to vote?

> safe storage

If you simply mean prosecution for being negligent, that's fine. If you mean it has to be in a safe unloaded, that defeats their use for self-defense in the home. It would likely be held unconstitutional.

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#743

Post by StanislavPetrov »

phkahler wrote: post #698
freeflight wrote: post #527

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Privacy is already a UHR according to UDHR article 12 [0] The problem with applying this is that the violation of privacy is not arbitrary , from the draft: > Law enforcement and judicial authorities must be able to access data in a lawful and targeted manner So this is framed as an matter of lawful and targeted intercept, not blanket bulk access, like pretty much all of the mass surveillance creep. [0] https://www.u…

>> Law enforcement and judicial authorities must be able to access data in a lawful and targeted manner As is the case everywhere, they claim to want lawful access. In reality that's a minor point, what they really want is access to information without the knowledge of its owner. They're OK with needing approval or getting a warrant to read your email just as long as it's some 3rd party granting access so you won't k…

>They're OK with needing approval or getting a warrant to read your email just as long as it's some 3rd party granting access so you won't know.

Of course nobody will ever examine the warrants or the approval process to ensure that "lawful access" is only granted when even the minimal evidentiary standards they require are met. And if they do someday examine those warrants, and find out that they are riddled with falsehoods and inaccuracies that resulted in unlawful spying, it will all be swept under the rug and nobody responsible will be held to legal account - as we have seen in the US.

https://www.npr.org/2020/03/31/824510255/justice-department-...

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#744

Post by stjohnswarts »

Shivetya wrote: post #613
Cthulhu_ wrote: post #550

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As it should, but who will verify it's only used in that way? Who watches the watchmen? Snowden revealed that the watchmen (NSA) are scooping up all data they can find, and that they have easy access to big internet companies' data (and they're not allowed to mention your data was accessed, even if no charges were made).

Well that is the crux of the issue, how much do you trust your government and what are your options in supporting change. This may require a level of involvement in politics that is more time consuming than most want to expend or can. This means if not actively supporting a candidate or current representative who shares your views that you instead convince them your view is worthwhile. If not actively finding one who…

I appreciate libertarian ideas about privacy, freedom to own weapons, speech, religion, etc. I just don't agree with them a whole lot on economic issues, but they have personal freedom down pat. I think the point about government isn't that I'm so worried about the government --currently--, but I know government almost never gives something back that they take away. In this case it's privacy. Hopefully the EU government (or at least the members of the EU individually) will realize this is an autocratic power grab and doesn't make anyone safer. You'd think they'd have had enough with dictators and autocratic governments knowing everything you do given what happened in WW1 and WW2

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#745

Post by stjohnswarts »

nitrogen wrote: post #707
foldr wrote: post #695

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I guess "so you're happy with random police officers[0] browsing your nudes, then?". I agree with your point, but I think a lot of people aren't actually too worried about the specific case of random police officers seeing their nude selfies.

It's hard to convey the idea that a real person is behind the faceless snooping, but usually people don't want a real person looking at their private info. "Do you want the cop who pulls your daughter over for forgetting to put the new sticker on her license plate to be able to look up all her beach photos during the stop?"

Cops want to be able to see everything. I don't think it comes necessarily from want to see nude in particular. Government likes power, the more they get, the more they want. That includes cops. They can't think beyond their own mind often. Most people would probably (at the beginning) use backdoors responsibly, but when it becomes mundane they will use it all the time and without compuncture. This leads to power grabs and politicization. If it's not an option at all, it helps a lot.

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#746

Post by stjohnswarts »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #552
int_19h wrote: post #502

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's right to privacy, not right to encryption specifically. And governments cracking down on encryption will, of course, claim that it is a matter of national security, and is a proportionate action to fight terrorism, child pornography, and other crimes.

Just like phone taps and listening devices. That said, those should only be employed if there is reasonable suspicion; iirc they still need a judge to approve employing these tools. The fear with this is that they will try and catch all messages and retroactively look for bad actors. And of course that the backdoors will be discovered and abused by bad actors.

They need a judge currently. However in the USA it's a rubber stamp and warrants are almost never not given. It's around 98-99% are granted in FISA courts and it's a total joke.

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#747

Post by stjohnswarts »

jordanbeiber wrote: post #544
freeflight wrote: post #533

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Switzerland and several other Eurpean countries have very high rates of gun ownership, but low rates of gun violence. They also have vastly stricter gun regulation laws, and while ownership rates are high in some, the US is an extreme outlier and no other country comes even close. Because nobody in any European country thinks they have a "right" to own a gun, most of them could if they wanted to, but they simply do…

The fact so many people feel they need a gun for safety is the first and biggest issue IMO. This is fueled by movies and culture - have the gun in your possession and you’ll automatically win the fight - that was easy! I’ve read countless comments from Americans that they have a gun to shoot intruders. Statistics telling you there’s a bigger chance someone else will get hurt be damned. These ideas are have to be fuel…

People who would like to take guns away should start working on changing the Constitution. Looking at the current lineup in the Supreme court all I can say is good luck. I totally support a country's choice to de-arm their populace. However I also wish they would quit trying to push their beliefs on the USA as well. Nothing in this world is safe, from driving to work, to walking down a street you don't know, to repelling off a cliff, or parachuting for fun yet no one says "don't do that, let's make it illegal", yet with guns they freak out.

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#748

Post by nitrogen »

agensaequivocum wrote: post #738
nitrogen wrote: post #710

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe things have changed drastically in the 8 years since I left, but I doubt it. I think they have. I've also seen more gun stores opening, with provocative names. I've no problem with firearms used responsibly for hunting or recreation, but in the very few cases I've seen someone open carrying a handgun (once at a very crowded national park, and once at a residential picnic area, both just this year) it was clear…

> but to threaten others. No. I've open carried. We do not do it to threaten people. There are many reasons to one chooses to open or conceal carry.

One of the dudes was wearing a t-shirt with wording that strongly supports my evaluation. But even if you aren't trying to threaten, the visible presence of a deadly weapon (especially a sleek semi-auto as opposed to a revolver) creates a pretty negative "vibe". Note that I'm talking about handguns stuffed into a belt or on a leg holster, not e.g. a hunting rifle or shotgun.

Re: EU Draft Council Declaration Against Encryption [pdf]

#750

Post by ashtonkem »

supportlocal4h wrote: post #347
nix23 wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>We live in a dangerous world. No we don't, but that's what the Politicians try to implement in our brains.

We do live in a dangerous world. Pretty much everybody loses their life somehow. It's amazing to me that so many of my peers survived childhood. It is pretty stupid to try to jump a car on your bicycle without a landing ramp. Or play catch with lit M80s. And those weren't our dumbest ideas. When I was a kid every 8-year-old pushed a lawn mower around once a week. And rode in the back of a pickup truck. Today I don't…

By the numbers, this is the safest the world has ever been. The fact that you literally don't know anyone who has had smallpox attests to that.

Perception of risk is not actual risk. Yes, everyone dies, but that's more of a biological fact than a statement about how safe this world is. If you're really worried about you and your family, watch what you eat and hit the gym a bit, because statistically it's going to be a heart attack that gets you.

Post reply on HN