4 ms·

First they came for crypto, and you guys laughed and cheered them on because “crypto and web3 sucks” I told you then, that end-to-end encryption is far more wo

by EGreg 2y ago

First they came for crypto, and you guys laughed and cheered them on because “crypto and web3 sucks” I told you then, that end-to-end encryption is far more worrying for politicians, than mere cryptographic signatures. And that they’ll be coming for it next. Because it can hide billion-dollar transfers, or CSAM, or gasp seditious material against the king. Well, it’s not just Europe, it’s all over the world: https://community.qbix.com/t/the-global-war-on-end-to-end-encryption/214 https://community.qbix.com/t/the-global-war-on-end-to-end-en... The above chronicles many cases even in your own country! Today regular people are just as clueless about end-to-end encryption as many on HN are about web3 and decentralized network innovations. Think of the children! And then they will come for the regular person, and by then there will be no one left making tools that could have helped them. As for me and my views, I have come to believe that end-to-end encryption vs state actors is a band-aid, that if you are reduced to sneaking around then your government and agencies need fixing. Whereas digital signatures and smart contracts and decentralized networks are useful as they allow everyone to be in control of their own identity, voting, balances etc. without relying on a third party. It’s done in the open. But the difference is that it can be limited to “benign” things and enforces the rules, while everyone gets to make their own decisions and one party can’t corrupt the system. To me, the transparency and resilience to corruption is the main thing. The sneaking around, I can see how governments can declare war on that.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> First they came for crypto, and you guys laughed Crypto has probably done more to undermine privacy than Hoover’s FBI. Its proponents are ambitiously unlikeable, relishing their distastefulness to burnish outsider credentials. Its damage is easy to quantify in a way troublesome speech is not. And because a broad set of the population either doesn’t like it or, much more prominently, doesn’t care, it serves as a stalking horse for advancing general anti-privacy laws. Signal is a great example. They should be a unifier for the notoriously-apathetic privacy crowd. But it isn’t. In part due to its crypto crossover. I genuinely can’t seriously take Signal as a canary of anything, because it’s unclear what motivates its leadership.
- EGreg 2y ago
  The same people who say they can’t take Signal seriously as a canary for anything because they did something with crypto are total cheerleaders for OpenAI even after it disbanded its ethics and alignment boards and did a lot of shady stuf. “Because crypto sucks in every way possible” and “because AI is awesome”. What about nuance and substance? This is HN. If you ask the average person, they’d say that people on HN and their snarky attitudes are far more unlikable than the people building decentralized networks that empower people. Vitalik Buterin. Tim Berners-Lee. Ian Clarke. The teams at IPFS, MaidSAFE, Freenet. I have interviewed many of them and spoken w them. They are humble, good people trying to make the world a better place. You just enjoy shitting on anything that has the word “web3”. Actually that keyword attracts automatic downvotes on HN since 2021, as in 3 seconds after you post. Try visiting, say, https://forum.autonomi.community/ https://forum.autonomi.community/ or https://ethereum-magicians.org/ https://ethereum-magicians.org/ and see now nice, courteous and constructive nearly every participant and post is. They are solving hard problems. Not shooting down snarkily anything in a cargo-cult fashion. Here is an interview I made with Ian Clarke for instance. Unlikeable? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWrRqUkJpMQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWrRqUkJpMQ
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > If you ask the average person I don’t know Europe’s polling. But in America, the majority is against [1][2]. (The only ones showing marginal favour ability are industry polls [3] by low-quality pollsters [4].) > You just enjoy shitting on anything that has the word “web3” I’ve made a lot of money from investing in companies that do things around crypto. Its users are a population willing to pay high fees for nebulous ideological points, almost uniquely so outside religion and politics. [1] https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/07/just-8percent-of-americans-have-a-positive-view-of-cryptocurrencies-now-cnbc-survey-finds.html https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/07/just-8percent-of-americans-h... [2] https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/04/10/majority-of-americans-arent-confident-in-the-safety-and-reliability-of-cryptocurrency/ https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/04/10/majority-... [3] https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/pollster-ratings/ https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/pollster-ratings/ Harris [4] https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20240507551232/en/DCG-Poll-Reveals-One-in-Five-Battleground-State-Voters-Consider-Crypto-a-Key-Issue-in-2024-U.S.-Elections#:~:text=DCG%2C%20the,of%20voters https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20240507551232/en/DCG...
kristiandupont 2y ago
Ah yes, if we had all just listened to you instead of laughed. How the tables have turned!
yard2010 2y ago
You make the politicians here the bad guys. And they are. But can you compare these assholes to terrorists? If the states aren't the bigger fish, the bad actors would be.
- BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
  I mean, politicians who push bad wars do far, far more damage than a terrorist ever could. Politicians who push authoritarian domestic policies instill fear into the hearts of more people than a terrorist ever could.

by EGreg 2y ago

JumpCrisscross 2y ago

> First they came for crypto, and you guys laughed Crypto has probably done more to undermine privacy than Hoover’s FBI. Its proponents are ambitiously unlikeable, relishing their distastefulness to burnish outsider credentials. Its damage is easy to quantify in a way troublesome speech is not. And because a broad set of the population either doesn’t like it or, much more prominently, doesn’t care, it serves as a stalking horse for advancing general anti-privacy laws. Signal is a great example. They should be a unifier for the notoriously-apathetic privacy crowd. But it isn’t. In part due to its crypto crossover. I genuinely can’t seriously take Signal as a canary of anything, because it’s unclear what motivates its leadership.

EGreg 2y ago
The same people who say they can’t take Signal seriously as a canary for anything because they did something with crypto are total cheerleaders for OpenAI even after it disbanded its ethics and alignment boards and did a lot of shady stuf. “Because crypto sucks in every way possible” and “because AI is awesome”. What about nuance and substance? This is HN. If you ask the average person, they’d say that people on HN and their snarky attitudes are far more unlikable than the people building decentralized networks that empower people. Vitalik Buterin. Tim Berners-Lee. Ian Clarke. The teams at IPFS, MaidSAFE, Freenet. I have interviewed many of them and spoken w them. They are humble, good people trying to make the world a better place. You just enjoy shitting on anything that has the word “web3”. Actually that keyword attracts automatic downvotes on HN since 2021, as in 3 seconds after you post. Try visiting, say, https://forum.autonomi.community/ https://forum.autonomi.community/ or https://ethereum-magicians.org/ https://ethereum-magicians.org/ and see now nice, courteous and constructive nearly every participant and post is. They are solving hard problems. Not shooting down snarkily anything in a cargo-cult fashion. Here is an interview I made with Ian Clarke for instance. Unlikeable? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWrRqUkJpMQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWrRqUkJpMQ
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > If you ask the average person I don’t know Europe’s polling. But in America, the majority is against [1][2]. (The only ones showing marginal favour ability are industry polls [3] by low-quality pollsters [4].) > You just enjoy shitting on anything that has the word “web3” I’ve made a lot of money from investing in companies that do things around crypto. Its users are a population willing to pay high fees for nebulous ideological points, almost uniquely so outside religion and politics. [1] https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/07/just-8percent-of-americans-have-a-positive-view-of-cryptocurrencies-now-cnbc-survey-finds.html https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/07/just-8percent-of-americans-h... [2] https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/04/10/majority-of-americans-arent-confident-in-the-safety-and-reliability-of-cryptocurrency/ https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/04/10/majority-... [3] https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/pollster-ratings/ https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/pollster-ratings/ Harris [4] https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20240507551232/en/DCG-Poll-Reveals-One-in-Five-Battleground-State-Voters-Consider-Crypto-a-Key-Issue-in-2024-U.S.-Elections#:~:text=DCG%2C%20the,of%20voters https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20240507551232/en/DCG...

kristiandupont 2y ago

Ah yes, if we had all just listened to you instead of laughed. How the tables have turned!

yard2010 2y ago

You make the politicians here the bad guys. And they are. But can you compare these assholes to terrorists? If the states aren't the bigger fish, the bad actors would be.

BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
I mean, politicians who push bad wars do far, far more damage than a terrorist ever could. Politicians who push authoritarian domestic policies instill fear into the hearts of more people than a terrorist ever could.