4 ms·

>(and I bet they will be major consumers of decrypting devices, looking for nasty pictures or conversations!). OK, and why would that be a bad thing? if it is

>(and I bet they will be major consumers of decrypting devices, looking for nasty pictures or conversations!). OK, and why would that be a bad thing? if it is done in the context of a case investigation.

spdustin 11y ago
#1) because in many jurisdictions it has no bearing on the divorce itself, and #2) in many jurisdictions a person who flirts with a consenting adult over text hasn't actually committed any crime in doing so Which leads to... #3) what is the point of decrypting said personal communications except to vindicate the estranged party's already fully-formed assumption that their spouse is a wicked person, or to exact some kind of court-sanctioned revenge. I swear, sometimes in threads like this it's hard to tell if someone is trolling or legitimately can't ponder the unintended (or, perhaps, fully intended but thinly veiled) consequences of laws that serve to grant the state access to private communications.
- hiq 11y ago
  > I swear, sometimes in threads like this it's hard to tell if someone is trolling or legitimately can't ponder the unintended (or, perhaps, fully intended but thinly veiled) consequences of laws that serve to grant the state access to private communications. The post you're answering to basically asks why removing privacy from society is a bad thing. I think that a simple link such as [1] is enough as an answer to this fairly common question, troll or not. [1]: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=998565 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=998565 ('I've Got Nothing to Hide' and Other Misunderstandings of Privacy)
- adrianlmm 11y ago
  Nobody is saying it is crime (I also mentioned unloyal behavior in my original post), but, in cases where there is evidence of infidelity why would that be a bad thing to decrypt the information if it helps in the case? And why are getting angry? do you feel unfortable that my concerts my be legit?
  - spdustin 11y ago
    If one suspects a spouse of infidelity, there are personal concerns related to trust and affection that need to be resolved. By the persons involved. Not by a judge, or a legislatively mandated compulsion to disclose every little thing, no matter how unrelated, you've ever said, into public record. Edit: You keep using the word "case". I do not think it means what you think it means.
    - adrianlmm 11y ago
      And what about those situations where there is actually a case, why is a bad thing to use decryption to find the truth?
      - runesoerensen 11y ago
        You've asked this question at least seven times in this thread. People have been surprisingly patient and given you a few answers. You may or may not agree, but please stop repeating yourself as it adversely affects the quality of the discussion.
        adrianlmm 11y ago
        >You've asked this question at least seven times in this thread w/o a proper answer, all I get is "Is not a case" and if I ask wht if there is case? I get people like you, so, do you have answer to the next question?: What if there is case? why is it bad to use decryption there?
        miscellaneous 11y ago
        Encryption enforces privacy. In a world with no privacy vulnerable people are easily abused by people in positions of authority. Also note that the legal system is not a perfect mapping to human morality - things that are are legal are not always moral and things that are moral are not always legal. Hence it is dangerous to have a world where right and wrong is determined only by an all-powerful legal system. In my opinion it is important for society to maintain the privacy that humans have experienced for thousands of years. Remember that mass surveillance of every conversation that you have ever had is new thing. Before the internet society had much more privacy. Encryption is a way to ensure privacy in the internet era.

spdustin 11y ago

#1) because in many jurisdictions it has no bearing on the divorce itself, and #2) in many jurisdictions a person who flirts with a consenting adult over text hasn't actually committed any crime in doing so Which leads to... #3) what is the point of decrypting said personal communications except to vindicate the estranged party's already fully-formed assumption that their spouse is a wicked person, or to exact some kind of court-sanctioned revenge. I swear, sometimes in threads like this it's hard to tell if someone is trolling or legitimately can't ponder the unintended (or, perhaps, fully intended but thinly veiled) consequences of laws that serve to grant the state access to private communications.

hiq 11y ago
> I swear, sometimes in threads like this it's hard to tell if someone is trolling or legitimately can't ponder the unintended (or, perhaps, fully intended but thinly veiled) consequences of laws that serve to grant the state access to private communications. The post you're answering to basically asks why removing privacy from society is a bad thing. I think that a simple link such as [1] is enough as an answer to this fairly common question, troll or not. [1]: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=998565 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=998565 ('I've Got Nothing to Hide' and Other Misunderstandings of Privacy)
adrianlmm 11y ago
Nobody is saying it is crime (I also mentioned unloyal behavior in my original post), but, in cases where there is evidence of infidelity why would that be a bad thing to decrypt the information if it helps in the case? And why are getting angry? do you feel unfortable that my concerts my be legit?
- spdustin 11y ago
  If one suspects a spouse of infidelity, there are personal concerns related to trust and affection that need to be resolved. By the persons involved. Not by a judge, or a legislatively mandated compulsion to disclose every little thing, no matter how unrelated, you've ever said, into public record. Edit: You keep using the word "case". I do not think it means what you think it means.
  - adrianlmm 11y ago
    And what about those situations where there is actually a case, why is a bad thing to use decryption to find the truth?
    - runesoerensen 11y ago
      You've asked this question at least seven times in this thread. People have been surprisingly patient and given you a few answers. You may or may not agree, but please stop repeating yourself as it adversely affects the quality of the discussion.
      - adrianlmm 11y ago
        >You've asked this question at least seven times in this thread w/o a proper answer, all I get is "Is not a case" and if I ask wht if there is case? I get people like you, so, do you have answer to the next question?: What if there is case? why is it bad to use decryption there?
        miscellaneous 11y ago
        Encryption enforces privacy. In a world with no privacy vulnerable people are easily abused by people in positions of authority. Also note that the legal system is not a perfect mapping to human morality - things that are are legal are not always moral and things that are moral are not always legal. Hence it is dangerous to have a world where right and wrong is determined only by an all-powerful legal system. In my opinion it is important for society to maintain the privacy that humans have experienced for thousands of years. Remember that mass surveillance of every conversation that you have ever had is new thing. Before the internet society had much more privacy. Encryption is a way to ensure privacy in the internet era.