4 ms·
And you'd rather have criminals that we can't catch because evidence is encrypted running around in the same streets as your children? Nobody's saying this law
by 1337shadow 5y ago
And you'd rather have criminals that we can't catch because evidence is encrypted running around in the same streets as your children? Nobody's saying this law was a silver bullet.
- inglor_cz 5y agoMost crimes leave a lot more evidence than just communication; physical illicit stuff, suspicious money transfers, blood, witnesses. The only exception I can think of is distribution of child porn. Everything else has a massive real world trace that can be used to convict the perps.
- ttybird2 5y ago"evidence is encrypted running around in the same streets as your children?" What?
- piaste 5y agoFor one, the kind of psychotic violent criminals that might assault random children in the streets are unlikely to get caught thanks specifically to cyber-surveillance. I am perfectly comfortable with having my children run around in the same streets as people selling drugs or stolen credit card numbers online. But to address your point less literally - "it might make it easier to catch criminals" is an extraordinarily weak justification for compromising the privacy of BILLIONS of citizens (WhatsApp, sadly, runs most of the personal communications in vast swathes of the world).
- 1337shadow 5y agoWell, that's nice because drug sellers are armed with AK-47s here. And crime is not limited to selling drugs and stealing credit card numbers (which is actually not a thriving business anymore ...), example: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-abuse-idUSKCN1GO1TJ https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-abuse-idUSKCN1GO1...
- adgjlsfhk1 5y agoyes.