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

Canada’s Bill C-22 Is a Repackaged Version of Last Year’s Surveillance Nightmare

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 154 posts

Re: Canada’s Bill C-22 Is a Repackaged Version of Last Year’s Surveillance Nightmare

#81

Post by EmbarrassedHelp »

qball wrote: post #38
EmbarrassedHelp wrote: post #30

Both the mandatory data retention and encryption backdoor requirements will cause encrypted messaging services like Signal, WhatsApp, iMessage, Matrix, and others to block both Canadians and Canadian businesses from their services. If you live in Canada or are impacted by this legislation, then you need to tell both your MP and the Minister of Public Safety of Canada to reject this legislation. --- The Canadian Civil…

[flagged]

Doing nothing is guaranteed to fail. Apathy only helps the bad guys win.

Messaging campaigns at least have a chance of influencing things.

Re: Canada’s Bill C-22 Is a Repackaged Version of Last Year’s Surveillance Nightmare

#82

Post by mothballed »

triceratops wrote: post #79
mothballed wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having spent my fair share of time in 3rd world shitholes, though I wouldn't particularly like Russia, most of them have levels of freedom in day-to-day life you could only dream of north of the Mexican border in the Americas. In a great deal of area, no one bothers to get a license plate. You can just build a house, no government asshole to block you, and if they do they are only looking for a small bribe. There is…

What would your family do if someone with a gun came and took away their land or their business?

They have tried and failed against some people I'm aware of. Unfortunately I don't feel comfortable going into details of exactly how they failed, but I understand it was quite persuasive. Of course in the USA and Canada, it is illegal to defend property by force, except maybe in Texas. So you will probably just get your things taken and then pray the police help (they probably will not).

In any case it's true that you'll probably have to defend your life and property if the government will not. Unfortunately I'm not seeing even western governments as effective at this, and to the extent it is effective, it's more a result of culture / personal self defense / non-governmental community efforts than anything related to the government. In this case having weak governance that at least doesn't have the judicial resources to prosecute people defending themselves can actually be a plus.

Re: Canada’s Bill C-22 Is a Repackaged Version of Last Year’s Surveillance Nightmare

#83

Post by Bender »

axus wrote: post #80
Bender wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I honestly don't know how things will (d)evolve from here. Official back-doors a.k.a. lawful intercept to encryption is an interesting twist, not a new proposal by any means but in the past this always ended up being hush-hush with small trusted inner circles of people at tech and telephony companies as they could never get such laws passed. If this passes I suspect it will be much harder to monitor terrorist activit…

> People will need to be careful how they speak as anything that can be taken out of context will be taken out of context. "As of late April 2026, former FBI Director James Comey was indicted by a federal grand jury on charges of threatening the life of President Donald Trump and transmitting a threat in interstate commerce. The charges stem from an Instagram photo of seashells arranged to say "8647," which prosecuto…

That's a perfect example. People can interpret that in a dozen different ways. There was nothing explicitly stated yet one specific interpretation was chosen and acted upon.

Re: Canada’s Bill C-22 Is a Repackaged Version of Last Year’s Surveillance Nightmare

#84

Post by Izikiel43 »

ordu wrote: post #51
Izikiel43 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Both (i) and (ii) have led the government to this dark place, thinking they're doing good. You can summarize a lot of government actions of any spectrum with: "The road to hell is full of good intentions"

When I was young I believed this was the explanation. I though I was smart and everyone else (with politicians at the top of the list) are stupid. But then I learned humility, and I don't believe in good intentions anymore. They can claim good intentions, and mostly they do, but their motives are far from anything that can be called "good intentions". They are not stupid, you know. They just try hard to look stupid.…

> But then I learned humility, and I don't believe in good intentions anymore.

I don't either, I agree with that's how they sell it, the problem is that the marketing works and good intentioned people rally behind it, so the saying still applies.

Re: Canada’s Bill C-22 Is a Repackaged Version of Last Year’s Surveillance Nightmare

#85

Post by jrflowers »

triceratops wrote: post #79
mothballed wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having spent my fair share of time in 3rd world shitholes, though I wouldn't particularly like Russia, most of them have levels of freedom in day-to-day life you could only dream of north of the Mexican border in the Americas. In a great deal of area, no one bothers to get a license plate. You can just build a house, no government asshole to block you, and if they do they are only looking for a small bribe. There is…

What would your family do if someone with a gun came and took away their land or their business?

Hire a lawyer to get it back from the police.

Re: Canada’s Bill C-22 Is a Repackaged Version of Last Year’s Surveillance Nightmare

#86

Post by stackedinserter »

bdamm wrote: post #52
qball wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

You need to branch out a bit, and take a look at how countries on the brink actually operate. Go check out Hungary for a country that almost lost their democracy, or check out Russia for a country that never had it but tries to pretend like it does. Canada is measurably not even close to countries like Russia, where voting truly does not matter (and could actually be hazardous to your health.)

In the last 15 years while I lived in Canada, my vote literally did not matter, thanks to FPTP.

Re: Canada’s Bill C-22 Is a Repackaged Version of Last Year’s Surveillance Nightmare

#87

Post by slopinthebag »

bdamm wrote: post #52
qball wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

You need to branch out a bit, and take a look at how countries on the brink actually operate. Go check out Hungary for a country that almost lost their democracy, or check out Russia for a country that never had it but tries to pretend like it does. Canada is measurably not even close to countries like Russia, where voting truly does not matter (and could actually be hazardous to your health.)

> where voting truly does not matter

This seems to be the case in Canada as well, at least for myself and my demographic. I've yet to win an election and I doubt I will until the older generations die off in a couple decades.

So there's really no meaningful difference for myself, except I could get fined for drinking a beer on the beach and I smoke because Zyn's are completely banned. Really "free" country eh.

Re: Canada’s Bill C-22 Is a Repackaged Version of Last Year’s Surveillance Nightmare

#88

Post by slopinthebag »

HerbManic wrote: post #57
tw85 wrote: post #35

There would of course be much more of a public uproar about C-22 and the steady diet of online censorship and surveillance bills served up over the last 6 years if they were being pushed by a Conservative government. But it's the Liberals, and they get a free pass from mainstream media who are subsidized handsomely for their complicity. If anyone believes the real intent behind this authoritarian legislation is to pr…

The major parties are usually just two sides of the same coin. This is a good example of it.

The bill where one party is against it and one keeps trying to ram it through over and over again, is a good example that the parties are actually the same? Pure unadulterated bothsideism. You can't even defend it, your only hope is to try and make it seem like the one party trying to do this isn't uniquely worse than the other choices.

Re: Canada’s Bill C-22 Is a Repackaged Version of Last Year’s Surveillance Nightmare

#89

Post by stackedinserter »

dyauspitr wrote: post #36
jmclnx wrote: post #22

The is the thing and it happens in every Country. If a bill fails to pass it or none like it should be brought up for 5 years. I know doing that would be crazy, but Companies keep trying and trying until it is passed. Tin Foil hat time: It almost looks like it is a way to funnel Political Contributions (bribes) to the politicians. The politicians fail the bill because they felt they did not get enough Contributions :…

> If a bill fails to pass it or none like it should be brought up for 5 years. The republicans would bring up a bill for everything they don’t like and ceremonially vote it down which would make it inaccessible to the next round of democratic leadership.

[flagged]

Re: Canada’s Bill C-22 Is a Repackaged Version of Last Year’s Surveillance Nightmare

#90

Post by slopinthebag »

tw85 wrote: post #35

There would of course be much more of a public uproar about C-22 and the steady diet of online censorship and surveillance bills served up over the last 6 years if they were being pushed by a Conservative government. But it's the Liberals, and they get a free pass from mainstream media who are subsidized handsomely for their complicity. If anyone believes the real intent behind this authoritarian legislation is to pr…

"A country where the media attack the Opposition rather than the government is a country where freedom is under threat." - Peter Hitchens
Post reply on HN