4 ms·

A new bill could punish web platforms for using end-to-end encryption

89 points by elorant 7y ago

philipkiely 7y ago
A classic case of the 4 horsemen of the infocolypse [1] invoked to threaten digital liberties. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_of_the_Infocalypse https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_of_the_Infocalyp...
amarshall 7y ago
See also the discussion of Pfefferkorn’s critique of EARN IT which is linked from this article: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22202110 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22202110
- akersten 7y ago
  Even the title of the bill is so infuriatingly patronizing and un-American. "You want to stay out of jail? Why don't you EARN IT by letting us snoop in on your customers?" Disgusting.
cft 7y ago
This Graham/Blumenthal duo is out to finish off the remainders of the independent internet in the name of children. Even separately from encryption, it is likely that the required technical threshold (likely non-trivial ML models) and the legal complexity of automatically censoring user uploads will be above the capabilities of most small independent forums, remaining popular independent sites like Mastodon instances, 4chan (which has already been effectively demonetized by the advertisers), etc. The authors of the bill don't mind: it's easier to deal with the professional lobbyists of a couple of monopolistic giants than with a bunch of nuisance small websites.
patricklorio 7y ago
Part of me wonders if this will just accelerate the usage of protocols that don't have a centralized entity to host content. If there's no need for the Section 230 protection, this adjustment is irrelevant.
- awakeasleep 7y ago
  This is a seductive and false type of thinking we’re susceptible to. The law matters. If the protocol you're imagining is created, it'll be fought at the carrier level. Just because piracy hasnt been squashed yet doesnt mean we’ll be able to hack our way around obstacles forever
- arpa 7y ago
  Hey, so how's edonkey/gnutella/winmx/kazaa doin'?
- ryukafalz 7y ago
  Or, aside from that... section 230 was only needed in the first place because otherwise providers couldn’t moderate without being considered publishers. If section 230 goes away or is weakened too much, wouldn’t the simplest way for providers to avoid liability be to stop moderating altogether? Surely it’s not what we want, but it might be what we get.
moralsupply 7y ago
This sort of thing is going to keep happening while you believe in the legitimacy of the state. ps. Don't shoot the messenger
dang 7y ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22202110 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22202110
AndrewBissell 7y ago
Attorney General Barr: We're having a really hard time gathering evidence against child predators because of all this end-to-end encryption. Also Attorney General Barr: Sure, Epstein's New Mexico ranch was an epicenter of his elite child trafficking ring but there's really no need for the FBI to raid it anytime soon.

89 points by elorant 7y ago

A classic case of the 4 horsemen of the infocolypse [1] invoked to threaten digital liberties. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_of_the_Infocalypse https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_of_the_Infocalyp...

amarshall 7y ago

See also the discussion of Pfefferkorn’s critique of EARN IT which is linked from this article: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22202110 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22202110

akersten 7y ago
Even the title of the bill is so infuriatingly patronizing and un-American. "You want to stay out of jail? Why don't you EARN IT by letting us snoop in on your customers?" Disgusting.

cft 7y ago

This Graham/Blumenthal duo is out to finish off the remainders of the independent internet in the name of children. Even separately from encryption, it is likely that the required technical threshold (likely non-trivial ML models) and the legal complexity of automatically censoring user uploads will be above the capabilities of most small independent forums, remaining popular independent sites like Mastodon instances, 4chan (which has already been effectively demonetized by the advertisers), etc. The authors of the bill don't mind: it's easier to deal with the professional lobbyists of a couple of monopolistic giants than with a bunch of nuisance small websites.

patricklorio 7y ago

Part of me wonders if this will just accelerate the usage of protocols that don't have a centralized entity to host content. If there's no need for the Section 230 protection, this adjustment is irrelevant.

awakeasleep 7y ago
This is a seductive and false type of thinking we’re susceptible to. The law matters. If the protocol you're imagining is created, it'll be fought at the carrier level. Just because piracy hasnt been squashed yet doesnt mean we’ll be able to hack our way around obstacles forever
arpa 7y ago
Hey, so how's edonkey/gnutella/winmx/kazaa doin'?
ryukafalz 7y ago
Or, aside from that... section 230 was only needed in the first place because otherwise providers couldn’t moderate without being considered publishers. If section 230 goes away or is weakened too much, wouldn’t the simplest way for providers to avoid liability be to stop moderating altogether? Surely it’s not what we want, but it might be what we get.

moralsupply 7y ago

This sort of thing is going to keep happening while you believe in the legitimacy of the state. ps. Don't shoot the messenger

dang 7y ago

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22202110 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22202110

AndrewBissell 7y ago

Attorney General Barr: We're having a really hard time gathering evidence against child predators because of all this end-to-end encryption. Also Attorney General Barr: Sure, Epstein's New Mexico ranch was an epicenter of his elite child trafficking ring but there's really no need for the FBI to raid it anytime soon.