3 ms·

How can Crucially, according to reporting by The Washington Post, the FBI proposal would apply even to “Internet phone calls conducted between two computer use

How can Crucially, according to reporting by The Washington Post, the FBI proposal would apply even to “Internet phone calls conducted between two computer users without going through a central company server.” In a paper published Friday by the Center for Democracy and Technology, more than a dozen prominent computer security experts warn that such a requirement would be a disaster for the security of online communications. be enforced. You cannot fine an open source project. This is very bad idea - if you have to explain to non tech people use the analogy of FBI installing dormant microphones and holding keys to any person house with the promise that they won't abuse it.

wavefunction 14y ago
"cannot" I think you and the US Government have very different ideas about what can and cannot happen now or in the future. When I was growing up, the US Government "cannot" execute its citizens without due process (a trial). And now we see where "cannot" gets us when we use it as an ameliorative when describing a situation or potential situation.
- venomsnake 14y ago
  Well the problem is the US government always had the ability to shoot anyone on sight. It was just too much trouble before the blank cheque of 9/11 to use it. But a project that is just a bunch of source code with no owner - you are not technically able to prevent it from existing. The only way is (once again) outlawing encryption. I think that if we here in HN have spare time we could create a very solid P2P protocol that has plausible deniability of encryption (you cannot outlaw exchanging UDP packets of random data) And the problem with the government overreach can easily be solved by educating the public - then fighting "drug lord pedophile hacker Muslim terrorists" just wont pass everything with the public. Look at the awesome job the NRA is doing. To prevent the thread degrading - no matter where you stand on the gun debate, you cannot deny their effectiveness at stopping any gun related legislation. So the government selling feat to the public is ready for disruption. One just have to find the proper way to communicate with the people. Make the first and fourth as sacred as the second and the problem is solved. This is marketing problem.
  - wavefunction 14y ago
    I agree about working on a message that resonates with the general populate. I've found it incredibly easy to seem like a crazy tin-foil hat guy with these sorts of situations, when a more sober, rational, and measured approach would have proven more effective. Personally, it's easy to get very emotionally fired up about these erosions of our civil rights, but I have to remind myself that for many people emotion === unbalance. So I'm trying to incorporate "gentleness" and humor into how I promote the causes I care about and how I talk about these potentially very serious problems. It seems to be much more effective than bombast!
  - simcop2387 14y ago
    I think that if we here in HN have spare time we could create a very solid P2P protocol that has plausible deniability of encryption (you cannot outlaw exchanging UDP packets of random data) And the problem with the government overreach can easily be solved by educating the public - then fighting "drug lord pedophile hacker Muslim terrorists" just wont pass everything with the public. This is theoretically what freenet is all about. I'd love to see it take off more for just this kind of thing.
nknighthb 13y ago
You can fine the individuals contributing to it.

wavefunction 14y ago

"cannot" I think you and the US Government have very different ideas about what can and cannot happen now or in the future. When I was growing up, the US Government "cannot" execute its citizens without due process (a trial). And now we see where "cannot" gets us when we use it as an ameliorative when describing a situation or potential situation.

venomsnake 14y ago
Well the problem is the US government always had the ability to shoot anyone on sight. It was just too much trouble before the blank cheque of 9/11 to use it. But a project that is just a bunch of source code with no owner - you are not technically able to prevent it from existing. The only way is (once again) outlawing encryption. I think that if we here in HN have spare time we could create a very solid P2P protocol that has plausible deniability of encryption (you cannot outlaw exchanging UDP packets of random data) And the problem with the government overreach can easily be solved by educating the public - then fighting "drug lord pedophile hacker Muslim terrorists" just wont pass everything with the public. Look at the awesome job the NRA is doing. To prevent the thread degrading - no matter where you stand on the gun debate, you cannot deny their effectiveness at stopping any gun related legislation. So the government selling feat to the public is ready for disruption. One just have to find the proper way to communicate with the people. Make the first and fourth as sacred as the second and the problem is solved. This is marketing problem.
- wavefunction 14y ago
  I agree about working on a message that resonates with the general populate. I've found it incredibly easy to seem like a crazy tin-foil hat guy with these sorts of situations, when a more sober, rational, and measured approach would have proven more effective. Personally, it's easy to get very emotionally fired up about these erosions of our civil rights, but I have to remind myself that for many people emotion === unbalance. So I'm trying to incorporate "gentleness" and humor into how I promote the causes I care about and how I talk about these potentially very serious problems. It seems to be much more effective than bombast!
- simcop2387 14y ago
  I think that if we here in HN have spare time we could create a very solid P2P protocol that has plausible deniability of encryption (you cannot outlaw exchanging UDP packets of random data) And the problem with the government overreach can easily be solved by educating the public - then fighting "drug lord pedophile hacker Muslim terrorists" just wont pass everything with the public. This is theoretically what freenet is all about. I'd love to see it take off more for just this kind of thing.

nknighthb 13y ago

You can fine the individuals contributing to it.