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

The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies

mullvad.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 425 posts

Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies

#91

Post by mdp2021 »

ShroudedNight wrote: post #9

This is so awful that it strikes me as likely being a door-in-the-face[1] proposal designed to make a more 'reasonable' proposal that is still vile on its own merits seem palatable. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Door-in-the-face_technique

Interesting that it has a name, to make "Door in the face" akin to the opposite "Foot in the door".

It is discussed by Charlie Munger as part of what he calls the "reciprocation tendency", after the studies from Robert Cialdini in the practice of "«ask for a lot and back off»".

Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies

#92

Post by geysersam »

yosito wrote: post #55
TOMDM wrote: post #2

This is especially important in the age of LLM's. Large scale surveillance while abusive and harmful has historically been limited in scale by the ability of those in control to trawl through data. Automated "moderation" of dragnet communications collection with modern AI holds the potential for a scale of abusive privacy invasion at unprecedented scales.

I'd be surprised if the NSA hasn't already had LLMs for some time.

They certainly have a massive data set to train on.

Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies

#93

Post by Llamamoe »

TOMDM wrote: post #2

This is especially important in the age of LLM's. Large scale surveillance while abusive and harmful has historically been limited in scale by the ability of those in control to trawl through data. Automated "moderation" of dragnet communications collection with modern AI holds the potential for a scale of abusive privacy invasion at unprecedented scales.

Just as ML vision and surveillance have been used in China to genocide Uyghurs, LLM and anti-privacy laws will be able to trivially replace the need for human collaborators in the perpetuation of any arbitrary atrocity.

Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies

#94

Post by rsync »

TOMDM wrote: post #2

This is especially important in the age of LLM's. Large scale surveillance while abusive and harmful has historically been limited in scale by the ability of those in control to trawl through data. Automated "moderation" of dragnet communications collection with modern AI holds the potential for a scale of abusive privacy invasion at unprecedented scales.

Interesting… I was thinking the opposite…

My personal ability to generate millions of real-looking messages has now exploded and I wonder how these proposed structures will function if everyone sends each other 1k suspicious messages every minute of every day ?

Maybe attach a zip-bomb to every message just for good measure?

Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies

#95

Post by Llamamoe »

mdp2021 wrote: post #89

The problem with a number of current societies is the shift from the idea of "citizen as a Man" to "citizen as a subject - a humble entity". This allows to propose conditions that "Men" would never accept. It is the very idea that is fading. ...In fact, for a number of today's common practices we suggest the proposer to think whether [prominent figure] would have ever accepted it.

Your argument comes across really wrong when you use "man" instead of "person".

Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies

#96

Post by auggierose »

ShroudedNight wrote: post #9

This is so awful that it strikes me as likely being a door-in-the-face[1] proposal designed to make a more 'reasonable' proposal that is still vile on its own merits seem palatable. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Door-in-the-face_technique

The proposal does outline Options A-E, and of course decides that Option E, the most aggressive one, is the way to go. Maybe they plan to fall back on D or C, if E gets rejected.

Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies

#97

Post by Llamamoe »

th15row wrote: post #88

It doesn't matter, the EU has already crossed the point of no return. Europe is either collapsed or an authoritarian dystopia by the 2030s, no in-betweens. I've been saying this for years and it will be funny to see europeans to catch up to this fact in real time.

Is there anywhere in the world left that's neither on the way to becoming a dystopia nor already a hellhole unless you're a male local?

Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies

#98

Post by Llamamoe »

chickencatsoup wrote: post #60

The fact that this being justified with the pretense of being "for the children" seems like such a transparent way to play on people's emotions. From the start of the proposal itself: "At least one in five children falls victim to sexual violence during childhood 3 . A 2021 global study found that more than one in three respondents had been asked to do something sexually explicit online during their childhood, and ov…

Almost all child abuse is perpetuated by people the child knows in person. The fact that there's a fuckton of creeps online has very little to do with it.

Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies

#99

Post by mdp2021 »

Llamamoe wrote: post #95
mdp2021 wrote: post #89

The problem with a number of current societies is the shift from the idea of "citizen as a Man" to "citizen as a subject - a humble entity". This allows to propose conditions that "Men" would never accept. It is the very idea that is fading. ...In fact, for a number of today's common practices we suggest the proposer to think whether [prominent figure] would have ever accepted it.

Your argument comes across really wrong when you use "man" instead of "person".

[flagged]
Post reply on HN