3 ms·
Fundamentally, the tension is between the universal laws of mathematics on which encryption is based and the politicians and police who don't understand them.
by strix_varius 2y ago
Fundamentally, the tension is between the universal laws of mathematics on which encryption is based and the politicians and police who don't understand them.
This quote from the article brings that into stark relief: "we do not accept that there need be a binary choice between cyber security or privacy on the one hand and public safety on the other. Absolutism on either side is not helpful"
Clearly, Europol misunderstands the fundamental, mathematically binary, nature of encryption as man-made "absolutism" that could be dispelled with just enough laws and warrants and wiretaps.
- williamcotton 2y agoThe laws of math and physics have very little to do with the determinations of the laws of people. You can’t ban the chemistry of creating alcohol from homegrown grapes but you can ban and enforce against the practice well enough to limit bootlegging. The average person buys from the state regulated dispenser regardless of the possibility of doing otherwise. The same COULD (uh oh, about to be misread and downvoted into oblivion) be said for cryptography, where bans of consumer friendly and easily available messaging applications would be similar to curbing bootlegging. Of course the practice would continue for those who are capable but with consequences. These are issues that must be reconciled. Hiding behind numbers will not work, as we are seeing play out in front of us, so we need constitutional protections.
- strix_varius 2y ago> The laws of math and physics have very little to do with the determinations of the laws of people. This cannot be true, as we've seen time and again with cryptography. Wherever the laws of people collide with the laws of mathematics, the laws of mathematics win.
- fsflover 2y agoHas the mathematics won in China yet?