7 ms·

If I ran an neighborhood ISP, and the cops asked me to spy on a neighbor (for reasons they wouldn't even provide), then I'd shut down first. If they just wante

If I ran an neighborhood ISP, and the cops asked me to spy on a neighbor (for reasons they wouldn't even provide), then I'd shut down first. If they just wanted to search _my_ stuff, sure. But if the only reason that I'm even capable of assisting the government in spying on somebody is that they are my customer, neighbor, friend, or user then I will not offer that assistance. That would be evil. Don't be evil.

burrows 7y ago
The cops plant CP your servers. Help them spy on Joey Beer or they'll pursue criminal charges against you. Now what?
- rcoveson 7y ago
  Gun to my head, would I still do the right thing? Of course I'll say yes, and I hope it's true. Thankfully, I probably won't ever have to find out. But if it does come to that, and I choose wrong, I know I won't write a blog post about it.
- Hnrobert42 7y ago
  What are you talking about? What are the odds of this? I mean really, like out of all the CP allegations, how many of them are fabricated by the police?
  - ycombi3 7y ago
    You might be surprised. Check out what the fbi was doing to people a few years back hacking into victim's networks.
Hnrobert42 7y ago
Supporting the government in lawful operations is not evil. There are many, many examples of the abuse of power by the government. But at least in the US, there is a system of checks and balances including freedom of the press and an independent judiciary. If we give up faith in those things then we will succumb to a lawless, might-makes-right society. What makes you think you know better than the duly elected and appointed representatives of the people? Ok, fine. Tell it to a judge. But if you lose, then comply. TL;DR: I don’t like “the man” either, but in the end, the man is us. We thwart him at our peril.
- rcoveson 7y ago
  > Supporting the government in lawful operations is not evil. No, it often is. I don't think I need to cite examples. I'm not advocating for anarchy, and I haven't given up faith in the justice system as a whole. However, there are still many things that I will not do, despite being legally compelled. Leveraging my relationships, professional or personal, to help an agency with a dirty track record spy on people is among those things. Statements like this... > Tell it to a judge. But if you lose, then comply. ...are extremely problematic. You can argue that most of the time, in a social order that you believe to be a net positive, you should comply rather than rebel. But phrasing it as an absolute perpetuates any existing authority, no matter how corrupt, forever. If you are sufficiently confident that the right thing to do, taking into account all the disruption it may cause, is not to comply, then you are still morally obligated not to comply. What is right and what is legal do not always agree. And yes, that is still true even in a society that theoretically allows for change "through the proper channels". Even in the US, many of the most important changes to the law have been made by breaking it. Again, I don't feel the need to cite examples, since we have entire days of the year to celebrate most of them.
- ycombi3 7y ago
  The government version of "lawful operations" is them just getting some flimsy warrant rubber stamped by a judge who has absolutely no clue (or care) about how technology works. The great thing about technology is that it doesn't have to put up with things like useless warrants. Using encryption is the equivalent to have a reinforced door protecting you from people who want to do harm to you that ignores all warrants and cannot be broken or talked down. Thank god for encryption that works, it literally saves lives from the current crops of tyrannical governments worldwide.
- duncan_bayne 7y ago
  At what point in the author's encounter with Dave did Dave provide any evidence whatsoever that he was engaged in a lawful operation?

burrows 7y ago

The cops plant CP your servers. Help them spy on Joey Beer or they'll pursue criminal charges against you. Now what?

rcoveson 7y ago
Gun to my head, would I still do the right thing? Of course I'll say yes, and I hope it's true. Thankfully, I probably won't ever have to find out. But if it does come to that, and I choose wrong, I know I won't write a blog post about it.
Hnrobert42 7y ago
What are you talking about? What are the odds of this? I mean really, like out of all the CP allegations, how many of them are fabricated by the police?
- ycombi3 7y ago
  You might be surprised. Check out what the fbi was doing to people a few years back hacking into victim's networks.

Hnrobert42 7y ago

Supporting the government in lawful operations is not evil. There are many, many examples of the abuse of power by the government. But at least in the US, there is a system of checks and balances including freedom of the press and an independent judiciary. If we give up faith in those things then we will succumb to a lawless, might-makes-right society. What makes you think you know better than the duly elected and appointed representatives of the people? Ok, fine. Tell it to a judge. But if you lose, then comply. TL;DR: I don’t like “the man” either, but in the end, the man is us. We thwart him at our peril.

rcoveson 7y ago
> Supporting the government in lawful operations is not evil. No, it often is. I don't think I need to cite examples. I'm not advocating for anarchy, and I haven't given up faith in the justice system as a whole. However, there are still many things that I will not do, despite being legally compelled. Leveraging my relationships, professional or personal, to help an agency with a dirty track record spy on people is among those things. Statements like this... > Tell it to a judge. But if you lose, then comply. ...are extremely problematic. You can argue that most of the time, in a social order that you believe to be a net positive, you should comply rather than rebel. But phrasing it as an absolute perpetuates any existing authority, no matter how corrupt, forever. If you are sufficiently confident that the right thing to do, taking into account all the disruption it may cause, is not to comply, then you are still morally obligated not to comply. What is right and what is legal do not always agree. And yes, that is still true even in a society that theoretically allows for change "through the proper channels". Even in the US, many of the most important changes to the law have been made by breaking it. Again, I don't feel the need to cite examples, since we have entire days of the year to celebrate most of them.
ycombi3 7y ago
The government version of "lawful operations" is them just getting some flimsy warrant rubber stamped by a judge who has absolutely no clue (or care) about how technology works. The great thing about technology is that it doesn't have to put up with things like useless warrants. Using encryption is the equivalent to have a reinforced door protecting you from people who want to do harm to you that ignores all warrants and cannot be broken or talked down. Thank god for encryption that works, it literally saves lives from the current crops of tyrannical governments worldwide.
duncan_bayne 7y ago
At what point in the author's encounter with Dave did Dave provide any evidence whatsoever that he was engaged in a lawful operation?