5 ms·

It's also worth stating that the worst part of that proposed amendment [1] isn't even necessarily the VPN ban, it's the next clause, on page 20: "The “CSAM req

It's also worth stating that the worst part of that proposed amendment [1] isn't even necessarily the VPN ban, it's the next clause, on page 20: "The “CSAM requirement” is that any relevant device supplied for use in the UK must have installed tamper-proof system software which is highly effective at preventing the recording, transmitting (by any means, including livestreaming) and viewing of CSAM using that device." "Regulations under subsection (1) must enable the Secretary of State, by further regulations, to expand the definition of ‘relevant devices’ to include other categories of device which may be used to record, transmit or view CSAM" Apple, what did you start? [1] https://bills.parliament.uk/publications/63901/documents/7465 https://bills.parliament.uk/publications/63901/documents/746...

matheusmoreira 10mo ago
> any relevant device supplied for use in the UK must have installed tamper-proof system software It's happening. Computer freedom, everything the word "hacker" ever stood for, will be officially destroyed if this passes. We're about to be robbed of control over our computers by force of law. It's just the UK now but eventually it will be every country. This is a very dark day. I've been prophesizing its arrival for a while now. I was secretly hoping I was wrong about everything, that we'd turn this around, that we'd enshrine a right to control our computers into law. The opposite is happening instead. It's so sad...
- GaryBluto 10mo ago
  I wouldn't give up. When it gets to the level of mandatory government rootkits there are bound to be underground organisations circumventing this and/or trading old hardware. I'd even go as far to say that if things become this authoritarian, certain "direct" acts would be justified in preventing or fighting it.
  - ThrowawayTestr 10mo ago
    Don't worry, they'll make it a crime to open devices that don't have the rootkit.
    - GaryBluto 10mo ago
      I meant underground as in the Samizdat, not attempting to operate under the law.
  - matheusmoreira 10mo ago
    An illegitimate underground scene running on life support, using old unlocked computers which are a finite resource they will eventually run out of. Utterly depressing... We used to be free... If this passes, the only strategic move available is to somehow develop the ability to make our own computer processors in our garages. Billion dollar fabs are single points of failure and they will be exploited, subverted, regulated and controlled. The only possible solution is to democratize and decentralize semiconductor manufacturing to the point anyone can do it. We must be able to make free computer hardware at home just like we can make free computer software at home. Anything short of this and it's over.
    - pjc50 10mo ago
      In practice, import them from China like we used to with region unlockable DVD players. > democratize and decentralize semiconductor manufacturing to the point anyone can do it. Physics makes this completely unrealistic.
    - autoexec 10mo ago
      > If this passes, the only strategic move available is to somehow develop the ability to make our own computer processors in our garages. How feasible is this really? I'd feel a lot better if it were possible to produce chips free from backdoors even if the resulting CPUs weren't even as fast as an old Pentium III, but my guess is that any effort to do this at scale will be quickly shutdown by the government
      - matheusmoreira 10mo ago
        No idea how feasible this is. When it comes to electronics in general I'm pretty much beginner level. Here's an example that was posted here recently: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46178789 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46178789 Lithographically fabricated integrated circuit in a garage. Whatever this is, we need a lot more of it to stand a chance at resisting governments. > any effort to do this at scale will be quickly shutdown by the government The whole idea is to make this so easy and ubiquitous that they can't shut it down completely. They can shut down some but not all. I believe this is the only way a law like this can be resisted. Promote civil disobedience by making it easy.
  - ianmcgowan 10mo ago
    Sounds like the plot of "Big Brother" by Cory Doctorow
- agwp 10mo ago
  The absurd thing is that the amendment only covers smartphones and tablets - which means those who the bill aims to target can easily break the law by using a laptop, desktop, camera, smart TV etc. In short, the Pandora's Box of automated surveillance and security risk on any smartphone or tablet is opened, while a gigantic loophole for serious offenders is left open.
  - orangecat 10mo ago
    Give it time. The natural end state is that all computing devices available to the general public are dumb framebuffers that are only capable of displaying a UI running in the cloud. No more privacy for anything; even if the cloud OS lets you run Linux in a VM, everything you do will be visible and constantly monitored for suspicious activity.
  - matheusmoreira 10mo ago
    Computers are too powerful, too subversive for us citizens to have access to. Give citizens computers and they can copy at will, making a mockery out of things like copyright, they'd wipe out entire sectors of the economy if left unchecked. Give citizens computers and they will have cryptography which can defeat police, judges, governments, spies, militaries. They cannot tolerate it. They will eventually lock everything down. PCs were left out because everyone is on mobile these days, not because they are opposed to locking them down. They will close the loophole if it becomes an issue. Besides, with remote attestation they can just designate those devices as untrustworthy and ban them from everything. It's a politico-technological arms race. They make some law, we make technology that subverts it. Due to technology, they must continuously increase their own tyranny in order to enjoy the same level of control they had before. The end result is either an uncontrollable population or a totalitarian state. We're heading towards the latter. I was hoping the government's limits would be discovered along the way, some set of basic principles it'd refrain from violating in its quest for control, thereby reaching the fabled "the ideal amount of crime is non-zero" state. Turns out governments know no limits.
    - bamboozled 10mo ago
      The other side of this coin is that, disgusting horrific pedophiles, terrorists and drug smugglers also have access to this stuff too. I'm not in support of this bill, I'm just saying whenever I read these arguments, it's almost like you're entirely discounting the challenge the very tech your praising incurs for law enforcement and society. For me the paradox is simple, one the one hand people want everything to be "open and transparent" including their computers, but those same people often want the ability to completely hide everything in cryptography. Which one is it? If you were for openness and transparency in it's entirety, why wouldn't you by default be against cryptography ? This paradox is where the rubber hits the road on legislation like this and likely why the average Joe Smith doesn't really care about the cause. Because realistically, it all sounds suspicious. To a law abiding citizen, if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.
- brandensilva 10mo ago
  They just won't stop. We needed to have laws in place to prevent digital IDs being continuously pushed on people because the powers that be want total control of all information. It's happening in the US now under the guise of AI data centers for consumers but I suspect it will be instead used to surveillance everyone who doesn't agree with the fascist government. This is Larry Ellison's public vision but Musk and Thiel also play a role.
- socalgal2 10mo ago
  The answer is obvious, every engineer should leave the UK as a protest. Yea, I know that's never going to happen. Still, I can dream
  - deleted 10mo ago
    [deleted]
- bamboozled 10mo ago
  Isn't a hacker someone who can subvert this stuff? Is it someone just just gives up because their iPhone has CSAM installed?
donmcronald 10mo ago
> Apple, what did you start? They're probably thrilled with themselves because everything will have to be closed, locked down platforms and devices. IMO the solution to child safety is education with strong user controls. Hell, just delete the social media apps from existence if the other option is dystopian control of our communications.
bitwize 10mo ago
It's already the law in Brazil that online services and "terminal operating systems" must perform age verification in a secure, auditable manner. This presumably includes smartphones and computers, meaning you can't just run an arbitrary Linux distro in Brazil anymore. I expect similar laws to pass in at least a few U.S. states by 2030—places like Texas, Mississippi, Louisiana, maybe Florida... When I say "the future is signed, verified code from bootloader to application level" I mean it will likely be backed up by force of law. No one complains about the mandatory safety features various governments require cars to come equipped with. The voices of a handful of nerds will go unheard when the law starts insisting computers come equipped with safety features also.
- wkat4242 10mo ago
  While that's really terrifying about Brazil, is it actually enforced? I can't really imagine there being a "Linux Police" kicking down the door of a hooded teenager and prying the Ubuntu DVD from his clammy hands. I mean this is the country of favelas where even the police don't dare to enter.
  - bitwize 10mo ago
    No, but Brazil can (and did) exercise strict import controls over what kind of electronics can get into the country. For the longest time the only game consoles you could legitimately get in Brazil came from Sega through special arrangement with Brazilian manufacturer TecToy—in particular, the Master System and Mega Drive. When the market finally did open up, import consoles were subject to stiff tariffs. Piracy was rampant. That's why the Brazilian gaming market is... weird to this day, and until recently was generally avoided by major manufacturers creating openings for also-rans like the Zeebo. So while police arresting a kid for having an Ubuntu DVD is unlikely, the Brazilian government twisting the arm of PC manufacturers to prevent the installation of any but approved operating systems on hardware sold to the Brazilian market is highly plausible. Since this already aligns with Microsoft's eventual goals, Microsoft and the PC manufacturers will just hasten the rollout of Palladium 2.0 and nothing will stop it.
    - 10mo ago
an0malous 10mo ago
Huh? How is this Apple’s fault?
- CGamesPlay 10mo ago
  Presumably, because they built the first client-side CSAM scanning technology. Random article about it: https://educatedguesswork.org/posts/apple-csam-intro/ https://educatedguesswork.org/posts/apple-csam-intro/
classified 10mo ago
Law never had anything to do with reason, but this is one more law that mandates an unreachable goal. This will trigger an untold amount of brain-rotten despotism.
theshrike79 10mo ago
> Apple, what did you start? Apple tried to do it in a way where nobody would see your personal data until they had multiple confirmed matches against known CSAM - and even then a human would check the results before involving any law enforcement. But the internet had one of their Misunderstanding Olympics and now we're here again - with an even shittier solution, being formed into actual law.
freefaler 10mo ago
14 years ago, Cory Doctorow warned us about that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbYXBJOFgeI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbYXBJOFgeI The modern societies run via those devices and the enforcement will move to the mostly free Internet that was "a long time ago, when it didn't matter as much".
deleted 10mo ago
[deleted]

matheusmoreira 10mo ago

> any relevant device supplied for use in the UK must have installed tamper-proof system software It's happening. Computer freedom, everything the word "hacker" ever stood for, will be officially destroyed if this passes. We're about to be robbed of control over our computers by force of law. It's just the UK now but eventually it will be every country. This is a very dark day. I've been prophesizing its arrival for a while now. I was secretly hoping I was wrong about everything, that we'd turn this around, that we'd enshrine a right to control our computers into law. The opposite is happening instead. It's so sad...

GaryBluto 10mo ago
I wouldn't give up. When it gets to the level of mandatory government rootkits there are bound to be underground organisations circumventing this and/or trading old hardware. I'd even go as far to say that if things become this authoritarian, certain "direct" acts would be justified in preventing or fighting it.
- ThrowawayTestr 10mo ago
  Don't worry, they'll make it a crime to open devices that don't have the rootkit.
  - GaryBluto 10mo ago
    I meant underground as in the Samizdat, not attempting to operate under the law.
- matheusmoreira 10mo ago
  An illegitimate underground scene running on life support, using old unlocked computers which are a finite resource they will eventually run out of. Utterly depressing... We used to be free... If this passes, the only strategic move available is to somehow develop the ability to make our own computer processors in our garages. Billion dollar fabs are single points of failure and they will be exploited, subverted, regulated and controlled. The only possible solution is to democratize and decentralize semiconductor manufacturing to the point anyone can do it. We must be able to make free computer hardware at home just like we can make free computer software at home. Anything short of this and it's over.
  - pjc50 10mo ago
    In practice, import them from China like we used to with region unlockable DVD players. > democratize and decentralize semiconductor manufacturing to the point anyone can do it. Physics makes this completely unrealistic.
  - autoexec 10mo ago
    > If this passes, the only strategic move available is to somehow develop the ability to make our own computer processors in our garages. How feasible is this really? I'd feel a lot better if it were possible to produce chips free from backdoors even if the resulting CPUs weren't even as fast as an old Pentium III, but my guess is that any effort to do this at scale will be quickly shutdown by the government
    - matheusmoreira 10mo ago
      No idea how feasible this is. When it comes to electronics in general I'm pretty much beginner level. Here's an example that was posted here recently: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46178789 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46178789 Lithographically fabricated integrated circuit in a garage. Whatever this is, we need a lot more of it to stand a chance at resisting governments. > any effort to do this at scale will be quickly shutdown by the government The whole idea is to make this so easy and ubiquitous that they can't shut it down completely. They can shut down some but not all. I believe this is the only way a law like this can be resisted. Promote civil disobedience by making it easy.
- ianmcgowan 10mo ago
  Sounds like the plot of "Big Brother" by Cory Doctorow
agwp 10mo ago
The absurd thing is that the amendment only covers smartphones and tablets - which means those who the bill aims to target can easily break the law by using a laptop, desktop, camera, smart TV etc. In short, the Pandora's Box of automated surveillance and security risk on any smartphone or tablet is opened, while a gigantic loophole for serious offenders is left open.
- orangecat 10mo ago
  Give it time. The natural end state is that all computing devices available to the general public are dumb framebuffers that are only capable of displaying a UI running in the cloud. No more privacy for anything; even if the cloud OS lets you run Linux in a VM, everything you do will be visible and constantly monitored for suspicious activity.
- matheusmoreira 10mo ago
  Computers are too powerful, too subversive for us citizens to have access to. Give citizens computers and they can copy at will, making a mockery out of things like copyright, they'd wipe out entire sectors of the economy if left unchecked. Give citizens computers and they will have cryptography which can defeat police, judges, governments, spies, militaries. They cannot tolerate it. They will eventually lock everything down. PCs were left out because everyone is on mobile these days, not because they are opposed to locking them down. They will close the loophole if it becomes an issue. Besides, with remote attestation they can just designate those devices as untrustworthy and ban them from everything. It's a politico-technological arms race. They make some law, we make technology that subverts it. Due to technology, they must continuously increase their own tyranny in order to enjoy the same level of control they had before. The end result is either an uncontrollable population or a totalitarian state. We're heading towards the latter. I was hoping the government's limits would be discovered along the way, some set of basic principles it'd refrain from violating in its quest for control, thereby reaching the fabled "the ideal amount of crime is non-zero" state. Turns out governments know no limits.
  - bamboozled 10mo ago
    The other side of this coin is that, disgusting horrific pedophiles, terrorists and drug smugglers also have access to this stuff too. I'm not in support of this bill, I'm just saying whenever I read these arguments, it's almost like you're entirely discounting the challenge the very tech your praising incurs for law enforcement and society. For me the paradox is simple, one the one hand people want everything to be "open and transparent" including their computers, but those same people often want the ability to completely hide everything in cryptography. Which one is it? If you were for openness and transparency in it's entirety, why wouldn't you by default be against cryptography ? This paradox is where the rubber hits the road on legislation like this and likely why the average Joe Smith doesn't really care about the cause. Because realistically, it all sounds suspicious. To a law abiding citizen, if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.
brandensilva 10mo ago
They just won't stop. We needed to have laws in place to prevent digital IDs being continuously pushed on people because the powers that be want total control of all information. It's happening in the US now under the guise of AI data centers for consumers but I suspect it will be instead used to surveillance everyone who doesn't agree with the fascist government. This is Larry Ellison's public vision but Musk and Thiel also play a role.
socalgal2 10mo ago
The answer is obvious, every engineer should leave the UK as a protest. Yea, I know that's never going to happen. Still, I can dream
- deleted 10mo ago
  [deleted]
bamboozled 10mo ago
Isn't a hacker someone who can subvert this stuff? Is it someone just just gives up because their iPhone has CSAM installed?

donmcronald 10mo ago

> Apple, what did you start? They're probably thrilled with themselves because everything will have to be closed, locked down platforms and devices. IMO the solution to child safety is education with strong user controls. Hell, just delete the social media apps from existence if the other option is dystopian control of our communications.

bitwize 10mo ago

It's already the law in Brazil that online services and "terminal operating systems" must perform age verification in a secure, auditable manner. This presumably includes smartphones and computers, meaning you can't just run an arbitrary Linux distro in Brazil anymore. I expect similar laws to pass in at least a few U.S. states by 2030—places like Texas, Mississippi, Louisiana, maybe Florida... When I say "the future is signed, verified code from bootloader to application level" I mean it will likely be backed up by force of law. No one complains about the mandatory safety features various governments require cars to come equipped with. The voices of a handful of nerds will go unheard when the law starts insisting computers come equipped with safety features also.

wkat4242 10mo ago
While that's really terrifying about Brazil, is it actually enforced? I can't really imagine there being a "Linux Police" kicking down the door of a hooded teenager and prying the Ubuntu DVD from his clammy hands. I mean this is the country of favelas where even the police don't dare to enter.
- bitwize 10mo ago
  No, but Brazil can (and did) exercise strict import controls over what kind of electronics can get into the country. For the longest time the only game consoles you could legitimately get in Brazil came from Sega through special arrangement with Brazilian manufacturer TecToy—in particular, the Master System and Mega Drive. When the market finally did open up, import consoles were subject to stiff tariffs. Piracy was rampant. That's why the Brazilian gaming market is... weird to this day, and until recently was generally avoided by major manufacturers creating openings for also-rans like the Zeebo. So while police arresting a kid for having an Ubuntu DVD is unlikely, the Brazilian government twisting the arm of PC manufacturers to prevent the installation of any but approved operating systems on hardware sold to the Brazilian market is highly plausible. Since this already aligns with Microsoft's eventual goals, Microsoft and the PC manufacturers will just hasten the rollout of Palladium 2.0 and nothing will stop it.
  - 10mo ago

an0malous 10mo ago

Huh? How is this Apple’s fault?

CGamesPlay 10mo ago
Presumably, because they built the first client-side CSAM scanning technology. Random article about it: https://educatedguesswork.org/posts/apple-csam-intro/ https://educatedguesswork.org/posts/apple-csam-intro/

classified 10mo ago

Law never had anything to do with reason, but this is one more law that mandates an unreachable goal. This will trigger an untold amount of brain-rotten despotism.

theshrike79 10mo ago

> Apple, what did you start? Apple tried to do it in a way where nobody would see your personal data until they had multiple confirmed matches against known CSAM - and even then a human would check the results before involving any law enforcement. But the internet had one of their Misunderstanding Olympics and now we're here again - with an even shittier solution, being formed into actual law.

freefaler 10mo ago

14 years ago, Cory Doctorow warned us about that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbYXBJOFgeI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbYXBJOFgeI The modern societies run via those devices and the enforcement will move to the mostly free Internet that was "a long time ago, when it didn't matter as much".

deleted 10mo ago

[deleted]