4 ms·

Rather than sending a message to a president who no longer has any elections left and has less than a year in office, wouldn't it make more sense to look up you

Rather than sending a message to a president who no longer has any elections left and has less than a year in office, wouldn't it make more sense to look up your legislators[1] and write letters to them? 1/3rd of US senators and all representatives have an election coming up. They care more about voters than they do about Apple's $38 Billion[2] in liquid assets, so they need to be convinced that votes are on the side of sound security. [1] http://openstates.org/find_your_legislator/ http://openstates.org/find_your_legislator/ [2] https://ycharts.com/companies/AAPL/cash_on_hand https://ycharts.com/companies/AAPL/cash_on_hand

cft 11y ago
Many of the senators have de facto lifetime terms. One can argue that writing to them makes even less sense.
jrcii 11y ago
It could be argued that the power of lame duck presidents cuts both ways since they can act with less fear of reprisal. You may still be right about prioritizing congress. Related, I once read an AMA on Reddit where a congressional staffer advised everyone to do their best to get op-ed pieces in newspapers which mention your elected officials, since it was their job and the job of the staffers they knew to compile such pieces for review every morning by the legislator.
- kiddico 11y ago
  here is said reddit post: https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/1os8rz/ https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/1os8rz/
tn13 11y ago
Agree. How about creating "Digital Civil Liberties" rating for every politician ?
- afarrell 11y ago
  Sure, but at this point isn't it about security infrastructure? As long as we frame it as Liberty vs Security, then there will be people who disagree and the side with the stronger emotional salience will win. The response to "if you have nothing to hide etc." Should be "What is the password to your bank account?", not a more abstract philosophical argument.
  - fapjacks 11y ago
    That's actually a very awesome response! Succinct, easy to digest, and impossible to defend against, even for proponents of evil.
  - tn13 11y ago
    No. It does not matter that it is about. No one is going to read the fine print. You need to get the perfect slogan that appeals to the dumbest person on street. My Gramps does not give a f888 about security or encryption. He cares a lot about civil liberties. Ask a random person on street "do you care about encryption?" v/s "Do you care about civil liberties?" and see the response. People who want abortion rights call themselves "pro-choice" where in reality it is about denying choice to a baby. People who want abortion ban call themselves "pro-life" where in reality they are denying woman right on her own body. The terminology makes all the difference and growth hackers in bay area understand it far too well. When apps ask for you phone number they say "This will help to keep your account secure" but in reality the number is being used to identify you as individual.
JumpCrisscross 11y ago
Has there been a more recent poll than this one from April 2015 [1] showing public support for intelligence-community (and greater mass policing) reform? [1] https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/field_document/privacy_poll_results.pdf https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/field_document/priv...
- studentrob 11y ago
  There have been a few polls about the specific iPhone issue [1] [2]. (All tend to be worded imperfectly and public opinion swings depending on how it is worded, suggesting the more the public is informed on the issue, the more they side with Apple's stance.) I tend to think that "public support for reform of mass policing" is too vague to get a real public opinion on. Everyone has different ideas on what needs to be reformed. By asking this questions you make citizens feel involved, but you don't get a real public discussion unless you are talking about something specific like putting back doors into phones. This was part of the problem with the Snowden revelations, in my opinion. There were so many that we had trouble attacking more than a few at a time. The larger issue of course is that the FISA court makes it impossible for the government to sufficiently comment on any of that. [1] https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160224/18124533706/way-you-ask-questions-matters-reuters-poll-says-people-support-apple-against-fbi-all-questions.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160224/18124533706/way-y... [2] http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/03/18/technology/document-Apple-Poll-Questions.html http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/03/18/technology/doc...
studentrob 11y ago
Why not both? From Josh Earnest's comments last Friday, it seems the President and he still do not understand that no law can keep encryption out of the hands of criminals [1] This needs to be understood by the President and the DOJ. Maintaining public security is an important, difficult job. We cannot rely on our family and friends to keep us safe, and our society and unity depends largely on law enforcement. [1] https://youtu.be/LRR2B5f82e0?t=38m25s https://youtu.be/LRR2B5f82e0?t=38m25s
threatofrain 11y ago
I don't think writing letters to senators do anything. High level elected politicians will likely have access to some kind of political consulting firm that looks at contentious districts or groups with strong get-out-to-vote organization in places that matter. Letters aren't going to fool a political consulting firm into thinking the needle of district opinion has moved somewhere. Perhaps the software workers of America should consider organizing a professional association, just like the AMA? It would have all sorts of benefits beyond organizing political action.
- Apocryphon 11y ago
  The ACM exists, but it'd be nice if it collaborated with the EFF more often for causes that impact the industry such as this.
  - studentrob 11y ago
    I can't find anything about actions the ACM has taken on this issue. According to their website [1], the USACM is responsible for US policy matters. The USACM website [2] does not mention anything about the ongoing DOJ vs. Apple case, or upcoming encryption laws being drafted by Burr-Feinstein. Their "Tech Policy Blog" is currently down ("Access forbidden!") [3] Most of the discussion I see about policy has to do about diversifying computer science and getting more women involved. This is laudable, but given recent news you'd think they would have some comment on their website about the DOJ, Apple, or encryption in general. The EFF, on the other hand, has kept us well informed about proposed laws and the Apple FBI case. [1] http://www.acm.org/about/history http://www.acm.org/about/history [2] http://usacm.acm.org/ http://usacm.acm.org/ [3] http://techpolicy.acm.org/blog/ http://techpolicy.acm.org/blog/
- studentrob 11y ago
  Informing your representatives of issues you care about definitely makes a difference. They have jobs because people vote for them. If a vocal group feels strongly about one issue, and they campaign for that, the representative needs to pay attention or they risk losing their job. Don't assume that someone else will represent you via a petition. Calling or writing yourself is much more powerful.

cft 11y ago

Many of the senators have de facto lifetime terms. One can argue that writing to them makes even less sense.

jrcii 11y ago

It could be argued that the power of lame duck presidents cuts both ways since they can act with less fear of reprisal. You may still be right about prioritizing congress. Related, I once read an AMA on Reddit where a congressional staffer advised everyone to do their best to get op-ed pieces in newspapers which mention your elected officials, since it was their job and the job of the staffers they knew to compile such pieces for review every morning by the legislator.

kiddico 11y ago
here is said reddit post: https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/1os8rz/ https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/1os8rz/

tn13 11y ago

Agree. How about creating "Digital Civil Liberties" rating for every politician ?

afarrell 11y ago
Sure, but at this point isn't it about security infrastructure? As long as we frame it as Liberty vs Security, then there will be people who disagree and the side with the stronger emotional salience will win. The response to "if you have nothing to hide etc." Should be "What is the password to your bank account?", not a more abstract philosophical argument.
- fapjacks 11y ago
  That's actually a very awesome response! Succinct, easy to digest, and impossible to defend against, even for proponents of evil.
- tn13 11y ago
  No. It does not matter that it is about. No one is going to read the fine print. You need to get the perfect slogan that appeals to the dumbest person on street. My Gramps does not give a f888 about security or encryption. He cares a lot about civil liberties. Ask a random person on street "do you care about encryption?" v/s "Do you care about civil liberties?" and see the response. People who want abortion rights call themselves "pro-choice" where in reality it is about denying choice to a baby. People who want abortion ban call themselves "pro-life" where in reality they are denying woman right on her own body. The terminology makes all the difference and growth hackers in bay area understand it far too well. When apps ask for you phone number they say "This will help to keep your account secure" but in reality the number is being used to identify you as individual.

JumpCrisscross 11y ago

Has there been a more recent poll than this one from April 2015 [1] showing public support for intelligence-community (and greater mass policing) reform? [1] https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/field_document/privacy_poll_results.pdf https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/field_document/priv...

studentrob 11y ago
There have been a few polls about the specific iPhone issue [1] [2]. (All tend to be worded imperfectly and public opinion swings depending on how it is worded, suggesting the more the public is informed on the issue, the more they side with Apple's stance.) I tend to think that "public support for reform of mass policing" is too vague to get a real public opinion on. Everyone has different ideas on what needs to be reformed. By asking this questions you make citizens feel involved, but you don't get a real public discussion unless you are talking about something specific like putting back doors into phones. This was part of the problem with the Snowden revelations, in my opinion. There were so many that we had trouble attacking more than a few at a time. The larger issue of course is that the FISA court makes it impossible for the government to sufficiently comment on any of that. [1] https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160224/18124533706/way-you-ask-questions-matters-reuters-poll-says-people-support-apple-against-fbi-all-questions.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160224/18124533706/way-y... [2] http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/03/18/technology/document-Apple-Poll-Questions.html http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/03/18/technology/doc...

studentrob 11y ago

Why not both? From Josh Earnest's comments last Friday, it seems the President and he still do not understand that no law can keep encryption out of the hands of criminals [1] This needs to be understood by the President and the DOJ. Maintaining public security is an important, difficult job. We cannot rely on our family and friends to keep us safe, and our society and unity depends largely on law enforcement. [1] https://youtu.be/LRR2B5f82e0?t=38m25s https://youtu.be/LRR2B5f82e0?t=38m25s

threatofrain 11y ago

I don't think writing letters to senators do anything. High level elected politicians will likely have access to some kind of political consulting firm that looks at contentious districts or groups with strong get-out-to-vote organization in places that matter. Letters aren't going to fool a political consulting firm into thinking the needle of district opinion has moved somewhere. Perhaps the software workers of America should consider organizing a professional association, just like the AMA? It would have all sorts of benefits beyond organizing political action.

Apocryphon 11y ago
The ACM exists, but it'd be nice if it collaborated with the EFF more often for causes that impact the industry such as this.
- studentrob 11y ago
  I can't find anything about actions the ACM has taken on this issue. According to their website [1], the USACM is responsible for US policy matters. The USACM website [2] does not mention anything about the ongoing DOJ vs. Apple case, or upcoming encryption laws being drafted by Burr-Feinstein. Their "Tech Policy Blog" is currently down ("Access forbidden!") [3] Most of the discussion I see about policy has to do about diversifying computer science and getting more women involved. This is laudable, but given recent news you'd think they would have some comment on their website about the DOJ, Apple, or encryption in general. The EFF, on the other hand, has kept us well informed about proposed laws and the Apple FBI case. [1] http://www.acm.org/about/history http://www.acm.org/about/history [2] http://usacm.acm.org/ http://usacm.acm.org/ [3] http://techpolicy.acm.org/blog/ http://techpolicy.acm.org/blog/
studentrob 11y ago
Informing your representatives of issues you care about definitely makes a difference. They have jobs because people vote for them. If a vocal group feels strongly about one issue, and they campaign for that, the representative needs to pay attention or they risk losing their job. Don't assume that someone else will represent you via a petition. Calling or writing yourself is much more powerful.