6 ms·

After a quick chat with regular (non-tech) people, they're fine with it. The main reason being that "they can't just do that, they need a judge to sign off on i

After a quick chat with regular (non-tech) people, they're fine with it. The main reason being that "they can't just do that, they need a judge to sign off on it". They do seem a bit unsurprised that the politicians carved out an exception for themselves ("of course they did"). People here still seem to have faith that the institutions generally work as intended.

candiodari 3y ago
No, the politicians and the state have just isolated themselves effectively enough from the riots. The riots are the only thing people can do to protest a number of measures, most seriously the changes to the pensions. These riots (and "riots", not all are violent, and I haven't heard at all of these rioters damaging people) don't affect the state much, but they affect regular people plenty. Torched cars. Destroyed shops. Nonfunctioning services. Police stations are now fortresses, as are most of the government departments. The state has made a definite choice: the hard hand, no help, and absolute priority to their own protection. Normal crime, like theft from stores, what people want the state to work on, is not even prosecuted anymore. You'd have to steal from a big store, in the city center, while an agent is there to have any chance of getting arrested (only youngsters, whom they can arrest indefinitely without evidence and convict even when innocent, ever get persecuted. Of course, the lack of evidence standards in cases against minors raise the question exactly how often these convictions (sorry "protection measures", not convictions) are fabricated. Let's just say the relation between police and youngsters is strained for some reason). People want this to stop, and so they want more protection of the state. The French state, of course, could be said to have been less than effective in stopping these riots and the destruction. People, including representatives, are just point blank assuming this will help the police to be effective. That the police is the cause of the riots does not seem to make a big impression. "Do not shoot people moving away from you in the face" is clearly to much for the police to handle. When you ask people "what else would you want people to do?" there are no answers, because especially nobody wants the obvious option: another long-term national strike. Ironically the state has done nothing but grow. This is the fundamental conflict: everyone has to "save" (especially people who can't), but not the state. With inflation people have to spend ~11% less, effectively. The state has decided their absolutely necessary expenses will not even have to return to pre-pandemic levels. People want protection, that's why this gets approved. But the state, where they believe to get this protection, is the direct cause of most of the problems people face.
- BlargMcLarg 3y ago
  >People want protection, that's why this gets approved. You're missing the most important detail: especially in Western/Northern Europe, people are taught from childhood on that the state is there to protect you, and protecting yourself is a risk. Europeans aren't just lazily asking for protection, they simply weren't raised to defend themselves from trespassers and assailants without the thought of potentially suffering consequences (even if it is just defamation). Of course these people are going to beg the state to do it, handing over whatever privacy or independence they believe not needed. They don't know any better. They've been raised on 'knives will be used against you' from toddler age.
  - banana_feather 3y ago
    As opposed to what in the United States? Anyone advocating for a reduction in the authority of law enforcement is pretty quickly relegated to the fringe of either party or actively beaten down depending what the conditions call for (the American public couldn't rubber-stamp the patriot act fast enough). As far as property crime against businesses is concerned, we absolutely should be telling people it's a risk to intervene. We should actively dissuade drugstore clerks from risking life and limb to stop someone from stealing a cart of sudafed in exchange for minimum wage at will employment with no benefits.
  - pif 3y ago
    > people are taught from childhood on that the state is there to protect you, and protecting yourself is a risk We are still waiting for an example of a sane society where the opposite is true.
    - pif 3y ago
      To people downvoting: please do add a comment with an actual example. Make HN Great Again!
    - aziaziazi 3y ago
      We are still waiting for example of sane society.
xinayder 3y ago
> People here still seem to have faith that the institutions generally work as intended. People everywhere still seem to have faith that the institutions generally work as intended.
- t0bia_s 3y ago
  Yes, in China majority are fine with their gonvermnent. Even most Russian's agree with Putin. No wonder that political obedience is common when most people in society has conformity behavior.
mikkei 3y ago
The most common sentence I keep hearing over the years is "I have nothing to hide". This is sad but that's the reality we live in. Whether people can trust the institutions, having an "official" backdoors to your devices makes it obviously easier to others individuals with actual bad intentions to exploit them.
- vladvasiliu 3y ago
  That's true, but the issue is that people aren't technical enough to realize this. They're told "don't worry! only we, the good guys, have that access!". So, since the people are in a stance of default trust towards the institutions, it makes sense for them to believe this. Plus, why would some bad guy try to hack grandma's mailbox? She has nothing of interest there, anyway!

candiodari 3y ago

No, the politicians and the state have just isolated themselves effectively enough from the riots. The riots are the only thing people can do to protest a number of measures, most seriously the changes to the pensions. These riots (and "riots", not all are violent, and I haven't heard at all of these rioters damaging people) don't affect the state much, but they affect regular people plenty. Torched cars. Destroyed shops. Nonfunctioning services. Police stations are now fortresses, as are most of the government departments. The state has made a definite choice: the hard hand, no help, and absolute priority to their own protection. Normal crime, like theft from stores, what people want the state to work on, is not even prosecuted anymore. You'd have to steal from a big store, in the city center, while an agent is there to have any chance of getting arrested (only youngsters, whom they can arrest indefinitely without evidence and convict even when innocent, ever get persecuted. Of course, the lack of evidence standards in cases against minors raise the question exactly how often these convictions (sorry "protection measures", not convictions) are fabricated. Let's just say the relation between police and youngsters is strained for some reason). People want this to stop, and so they want more protection of the state. The French state, of course, could be said to have been less than effective in stopping these riots and the destruction. People, including representatives, are just point blank assuming this will help the police to be effective. That the police is the cause of the riots does not seem to make a big impression. "Do not shoot people moving away from you in the face" is clearly to much for the police to handle. When you ask people "what else would you want people to do?" there are no answers, because especially nobody wants the obvious option: another long-term national strike. Ironically the state has done nothing but grow. This is the fundamental conflict: everyone has to "save" (especially people who can't), but not the state. With inflation people have to spend ~11% less, effectively. The state has decided their absolutely necessary expenses will not even have to return to pre-pandemic levels. People want protection, that's why this gets approved. But the state, where they believe to get this protection, is the direct cause of most of the problems people face.

BlargMcLarg 3y ago
>People want protection, that's why this gets approved. You're missing the most important detail: especially in Western/Northern Europe, people are taught from childhood on that the state is there to protect you, and protecting yourself is a risk. Europeans aren't just lazily asking for protection, they simply weren't raised to defend themselves from trespassers and assailants without the thought of potentially suffering consequences (even if it is just defamation). Of course these people are going to beg the state to do it, handing over whatever privacy or independence they believe not needed. They don't know any better. They've been raised on 'knives will be used against you' from toddler age.
- banana_feather 3y ago
  As opposed to what in the United States? Anyone advocating for a reduction in the authority of law enforcement is pretty quickly relegated to the fringe of either party or actively beaten down depending what the conditions call for (the American public couldn't rubber-stamp the patriot act fast enough). As far as property crime against businesses is concerned, we absolutely should be telling people it's a risk to intervene. We should actively dissuade drugstore clerks from risking life and limb to stop someone from stealing a cart of sudafed in exchange for minimum wage at will employment with no benefits.
- pif 3y ago
  > people are taught from childhood on that the state is there to protect you, and protecting yourself is a risk We are still waiting for an example of a sane society where the opposite is true.
  - pif 3y ago
    To people downvoting: please do add a comment with an actual example. Make HN Great Again!
  - aziaziazi 3y ago
    We are still waiting for example of sane society.

xinayder 3y ago

> People here still seem to have faith that the institutions generally work as intended. People everywhere still seem to have faith that the institutions generally work as intended.

t0bia_s 3y ago
Yes, in China majority are fine with their gonvermnent. Even most Russian's agree with Putin. No wonder that political obedience is common when most people in society has conformity behavior.

mikkei 3y ago

The most common sentence I keep hearing over the years is "I have nothing to hide". This is sad but that's the reality we live in. Whether people can trust the institutions, having an "official" backdoors to your devices makes it obviously easier to others individuals with actual bad intentions to exploit them.

vladvasiliu 3y ago
That's true, but the issue is that people aren't technical enough to realize this. They're told "don't worry! only we, the good guys, have that access!". So, since the people are in a stance of default trust towards the institutions, it makes sense for them to believe this. Plus, why would some bad guy try to hack grandma's mailbox? She has nothing of interest there, anyway!