5 ms·

Congrats, you don't get encrypted because you're not a member of a tightly regulated militia. Sarcasm aside, the only way to make sure people get encryption is

Congrats, you don't get encrypted because you're not a member of a tightly regulated militia. Sarcasm aside, the only way to make sure people get encryption is to make it impossible to restrict the technology. That's how encryption ended up spreading. You don't put disruptive tech on every computer on the planet by waiting for permission.

hprotagonist 6y ago
“and on that day the ACLU and the EFF cited DC vs Heller (2010), and a crack appeared in the heavens and a loud voice spoke, saying ‘oi! wot’s all this then?!’”
kevin_thibedeau 6y ago
There is no definition given for what "well regulated" entails. A bunch of nerds on the internet can certainly form their own militia to practice with crypto munitions.
skrebbel 6y ago
I see your point, but as a non-American who's flooded with videos of random Americans walking around supermarkets carrying semiautomatic rifles, I'm not sure what you mean with "tightly regulated militia".
- kelnos 6y ago
  It's a joke. The text of the 2nd amendment is slightly ambiguous. Many people (myself included) believe that the intent of it was to protect citizens' right to arm themselves, but only in the context of being a member of a state-run/regulated militia. Unfortunately SCOTUS has continually widened the scope of 2A over the years. > as a non-American who's flooded with videos of random Americans walking around supermarkets carrying semiautomatic rifles You need to broaden your news sources; this is by no means common, except for perhaps in a few gun-happy states like Texas.
  - mosselman 6y ago
    > You need to broaden your news sources; this is by no means common, except for perhaps in a few gun-happy states like Texas. The only places I have seen images like that is on sites like Reddit with some sort of 'Murica' text next to it, but it is still pretty insane that this sort of thing can be shrugged off as "this is by no means common, except for perhaps in a few gun-happy states like Texas.". To be clear, I am not criticising you personally, but isn't it crazy that there are places in the US where people go to the cinema or super market in tactical gear and rifles and that the people around them don't run away screaming?
  - jychang 6y ago
    > the intent of it was to protect citizens' right to arm themselves Unlike european countries, the american frontier was a dangerous place where every household needed a gun. Armed citizens existed regardless whether there was a militia or not.
    - jcranmer 6y ago
      Except it was also seen as a civic duty for able-bodied men to join the militia. If we're talking late 18th century, the Venn diagram of gun ownership and militia membership has a very large degree of overlap.
    - kelnos 6y ago
      While that may be true, that was not the intent of the 2nd amendment, which was there to ensure that regular citizens were both involved in the protection of the country's interests, and could act as a counter (by force, if necessary) to their own country if it decided to try to grab too much power and become tyrannical. Enshrining this right in the constitution had little to do with frontier safety.
  - texanstereot 6y ago
    Texas isn't like that either. I've lived in Texas for almost a decade and I've never seen someone open carrying a long rifle at the supermarket. Geez, the stereotypes people spread!
- kevingadd 6y ago
  The US is all about selective enforcement, and the undesirable hacker type and their unpleasant "cryptography" is likely a higher priority for munitions enforcement than an irritable white guy with an AR-15 at the supermarket, because only one of them actually threatens the status quo.
  - capitol_ 6y ago
    I think the important word here is "white"
    - throwawayinfo 6y ago
      You're being racist.
    - lkdsajflkfdsjg 6y ago
      Groups of black men also walk around with assault rifles. Flagging and downvoting this doesn't make it false!
  - raxxorrax 6y ago
    Well, not anymore as it seems. But the hacker type might now share common interests with the AR-15 guy.
  - ricksharp 6y ago
    But is the guy wearing a mask?
  - rob74 6y ago
    Cryptography and the AR-15 may both be classified at weapons, but you can't actually shoot someone with cryptography. I suspect that may also play a role when it comes to enforcement...

hprotagonist 6y ago

“and on that day the ACLU and the EFF cited DC vs Heller (2010), and a crack appeared in the heavens and a loud voice spoke, saying ‘oi! wot’s all this then?!’”

kevin_thibedeau 6y ago

There is no definition given for what "well regulated" entails. A bunch of nerds on the internet can certainly form their own militia to practice with crypto munitions.

skrebbel 6y ago

I see your point, but as a non-American who's flooded with videos of random Americans walking around supermarkets carrying semiautomatic rifles, I'm not sure what you mean with "tightly regulated militia".

kelnos 6y ago
It's a joke. The text of the 2nd amendment is slightly ambiguous. Many people (myself included) believe that the intent of it was to protect citizens' right to arm themselves, but only in the context of being a member of a state-run/regulated militia. Unfortunately SCOTUS has continually widened the scope of 2A over the years. > as a non-American who's flooded with videos of random Americans walking around supermarkets carrying semiautomatic rifles You need to broaden your news sources; this is by no means common, except for perhaps in a few gun-happy states like Texas.
- mosselman 6y ago
  > You need to broaden your news sources; this is by no means common, except for perhaps in a few gun-happy states like Texas. The only places I have seen images like that is on sites like Reddit with some sort of 'Murica' text next to it, but it is still pretty insane that this sort of thing can be shrugged off as "this is by no means common, except for perhaps in a few gun-happy states like Texas.". To be clear, I am not criticising you personally, but isn't it crazy that there are places in the US where people go to the cinema or super market in tactical gear and rifles and that the people around them don't run away screaming?
- jychang 6y ago
  > the intent of it was to protect citizens' right to arm themselves Unlike european countries, the american frontier was a dangerous place where every household needed a gun. Armed citizens existed regardless whether there was a militia or not.
  - jcranmer 6y ago
    Except it was also seen as a civic duty for able-bodied men to join the militia. If we're talking late 18th century, the Venn diagram of gun ownership and militia membership has a very large degree of overlap.
  - kelnos 6y ago
    While that may be true, that was not the intent of the 2nd amendment, which was there to ensure that regular citizens were both involved in the protection of the country's interests, and could act as a counter (by force, if necessary) to their own country if it decided to try to grab too much power and become tyrannical. Enshrining this right in the constitution had little to do with frontier safety.
- texanstereot 6y ago
  Texas isn't like that either. I've lived in Texas for almost a decade and I've never seen someone open carrying a long rifle at the supermarket. Geez, the stereotypes people spread!
kevingadd 6y ago
The US is all about selective enforcement, and the undesirable hacker type and their unpleasant "cryptography" is likely a higher priority for munitions enforcement than an irritable white guy with an AR-15 at the supermarket, because only one of them actually threatens the status quo.
- capitol_ 6y ago
  I think the important word here is "white"
  - throwawayinfo 6y ago
    You're being racist.
  - lkdsajflkfdsjg 6y ago
    Groups of black men also walk around with assault rifles. Flagging and downvoting this doesn't make it false!
- raxxorrax 6y ago
  Well, not anymore as it seems. But the hacker type might now share common interests with the AR-15 guy.
- ricksharp 6y ago
  But is the guy wearing a mask?
- rob74 6y ago
  Cryptography and the AR-15 may both be classified at weapons, but you can't actually shoot someone with cryptography. I suspect that may also play a role when it comes to enforcement...