5 ms·

EFF's 100-Day Plan

218 points by sinak2 10y ago

hackuser 10y ago
Unlike the vast majority of end users, many HN readers have inside influence over the technology threats - even if it's just lobbying for addressing them in your company and spreading the word to others. That gives us even more responsibility than most citizens. Here are EFF's recommendations: * Tech Companies, Fix These Technical Issues Before It’s Too Late https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/11/tech-companies-fix-these-technical-issues-its-too-late https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/11/tech-companies-fix-the... The U.S. (and other countries) will only be free if its citizens make it that way.
8166284 10y ago
The amount of PR and pandering done by the EFF and ACLU in the past couple months is obscene. Where were they under Obama?
leereeves 10y ago
TLDR: The same as it has been. > Make no mistake: privacy, liberty, and accountability are not partisan issues. > We’ve seen digital rights come under threat no matter which party controls the Oval Office.
- akjainaj 10y ago
  >Make no mistake: privacy, liberty, and accountability are not partisan issues. I don't think they believe that. Or at least they didn't whine so much about Obama, who was horrible for digital privacy. And Hillary would've continued that legacy, but of course they didn't whine about that either.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - vkou 10y ago
    This is nonsense. The EFF has been extremely critical of the Obama administration - especially in the wake of the Snowden revelations.
  - TallGuyShort 10y ago
    It's never seem that way to me [1]. [1] https://encrypted.google.com/search?hl=en&q=site%3Aeff.org%20obama%20administration https://encrypted.google.com/search?hl=en&q=site%3Aeff.org%2...
  - geofft 10y ago
    > And Hillary would've continued that legacy, but of course they didn't whine about that either. As Mr. President would say, "Wrong." Here they are whining about her eeemaaails: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/03/foilies-2016-recognizing-worst-government-responses-public-records-requests/#selfserver https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/03/foilies-2016-recognizi...
    - schmengazi 10y ago
      blorp blorp blorp! people died in bengasee! oh noes! not more dead people in bengasee??? what about the embassy??? four more year so that nobody ever dies in bengasee evar againnnnnnnnnnn hey guys dü yü remembar bengasee??? what an important talking point! blurp blurp blurp At some point, we'll have to redress the misuse of that echo chamber for political smearing.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
vinhboy 10y ago
This reminded me to donate. A lot of people in Trump's camp relentlessly defends the 2nd Amendment, but in my opinion, that is just a purposeful distraction to the real weapon we should be defending: a free and open internet. Now this also means defending against disinformation (ie. fake news), which is not something I saw on the EFF's plan. It's honestly very scary now that Theil and Palantir is in bed with them.
- leereeves 10y ago
  > a free and open internet. > defending against disinformation Pick at most one.
  - rm_-rf_slash 10y ago
    Not mutually exclusive, but the fix for the latter to ensure the former is education, not legislation.
    - leereeves 10y ago
      The power to declare something "disinformation" is the power to censor. I don't think I'd trust anyone who has governed in my lifetime not to abuse that power.
      - rm_-rf_slash 10y ago
        I think you missed my point. It takes critical thinking to discern truth from misinformation, regardless of political preferences.
  - sophacles 10y ago
    Disagree - The tools for hyperbole, opposing viewpoints, and factually false information do not prevent people from publishing it. Aggregators (facebook, HN et al) choosing to promote more vetted info is not the same as preventing people from publishing it. In fact I would go so far as to say that pushing for allowing anyone to publish on a free and open internet is necessary for defending against disinformation. The alternative is censoring (in a generic sense, not necessarily a law sense) things, which can heighten disinformation dramatically.
x0ra 10y ago
> 2. We will test and leverage the Freedom of Information Act. Wait... isn't Obama's administration the worst ever when it comes to FOIA denials ?
alacombe 10y ago
> 2. We will test and leverage the Freedom of Information Act. Wait... isn't Obama's administration already the worst ever when it comes to FOIA denials ?
- jakeogh 10y ago
  Yes. And prosecuting whistle-blowers. "well he's not prez now so so what?" is a amusing cop-out.
- burkaman 10y ago
  Obama isn't president anymore, so that isn't really relevant.
  - wang_li 10y ago
    It's the same civil service though.

218 points by sinak2 10y ago

Unlike the vast majority of end users, many HN readers have inside influence over the technology threats - even if it's just lobbying for addressing them in your company and spreading the word to others. That gives us even more responsibility than most citizens. Here are EFF's recommendations: * Tech Companies, Fix These Technical Issues Before It’s Too Late https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/11/tech-companies-fix-these-technical-issues-its-too-late https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/11/tech-companies-fix-the... The U.S. (and other countries) will only be free if its citizens make it that way.

8166284 10y ago

The amount of PR and pandering done by the EFF and ACLU in the past couple months is obscene. Where were they under Obama?

leereeves 10y ago

TLDR: The same as it has been. > Make no mistake: privacy, liberty, and accountability are not partisan issues. > We’ve seen digital rights come under threat no matter which party controls the Oval Office.

akjainaj 10y ago
>Make no mistake: privacy, liberty, and accountability are not partisan issues. I don't think they believe that. Or at least they didn't whine so much about Obama, who was horrible for digital privacy. And Hillary would've continued that legacy, but of course they didn't whine about that either.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- vkou 10y ago
  This is nonsense. The EFF has been extremely critical of the Obama administration - especially in the wake of the Snowden revelations.
- TallGuyShort 10y ago
  It's never seem that way to me [1]. [1] https://encrypted.google.com/search?hl=en&q=site%3Aeff.org%20obama%20administration https://encrypted.google.com/search?hl=en&q=site%3Aeff.org%2...
- geofft 10y ago
  > And Hillary would've continued that legacy, but of course they didn't whine about that either. As Mr. President would say, "Wrong." Here they are whining about her eeemaaails: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/03/foilies-2016-recognizing-worst-government-responses-public-records-requests/#selfserver https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/03/foilies-2016-recognizi...
  - schmengazi 10y ago
    blorp blorp blorp! people died in bengasee! oh noes! not more dead people in bengasee??? what about the embassy??? four more year so that nobody ever dies in bengasee evar againnnnnnnnnnn hey guys dü yü remembar bengasee??? what an important talking point! blurp blurp blurp At some point, we'll have to redress the misuse of that echo chamber for political smearing.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

vinhboy 10y ago

This reminded me to donate. A lot of people in Trump's camp relentlessly defends the 2nd Amendment, but in my opinion, that is just a purposeful distraction to the real weapon we should be defending: a free and open internet. Now this also means defending against disinformation (ie. fake news), which is not something I saw on the EFF's plan. It's honestly very scary now that Theil and Palantir is in bed with them.

leereeves 10y ago
> a free and open internet. > defending against disinformation Pick at most one.
- rm_-rf_slash 10y ago
  Not mutually exclusive, but the fix for the latter to ensure the former is education, not legislation.
  - leereeves 10y ago
    The power to declare something "disinformation" is the power to censor. I don't think I'd trust anyone who has governed in my lifetime not to abuse that power.
    - rm_-rf_slash 10y ago
      I think you missed my point. It takes critical thinking to discern truth from misinformation, regardless of political preferences.
- sophacles 10y ago
  Disagree - The tools for hyperbole, opposing viewpoints, and factually false information do not prevent people from publishing it. Aggregators (facebook, HN et al) choosing to promote more vetted info is not the same as preventing people from publishing it. In fact I would go so far as to say that pushing for allowing anyone to publish on a free and open internet is necessary for defending against disinformation. The alternative is censoring (in a generic sense, not necessarily a law sense) things, which can heighten disinformation dramatically.

x0ra 10y ago

> 2. We will test and leverage the Freedom of Information Act. Wait... isn't Obama's administration the worst ever when it comes to FOIA denials ?

alacombe 10y ago

> 2. We will test and leverage the Freedom of Information Act. Wait... isn't Obama's administration already the worst ever when it comes to FOIA denials ?

jakeogh 10y ago
Yes. And prosecuting whistle-blowers. "well he's not prez now so so what?" is a amusing cop-out.
burkaman 10y ago
Obama isn't president anymore, so that isn't really relevant.
- wang_li 10y ago
  It's the same civil service though.