4 ms·

In defense of digital freedom

28 points by denzil_correa 13y ago

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
synctext 13y ago
A European Politician with Digital expertise. An interesting read with a grasp of the ongoing issues. Did I die and goto heaven?
- EliRivers 13y ago
  That's a common reaction when confronted with the Dutch :)
  - jacquesm 13y ago
    We have Wilders to balance it out.
  - smutticus 13y ago
    That's such an arrogant thing to say :(
    - EliRivers 13y ago
      Does it seem less arrogant when I tell you I'm not Dutch and I don't live in the Netherlands?
      - synctext 13y ago
        Political rhetoric reached peaks with Wikileaks, Stuxnet and now it seems Pentagon subcontractors got hacked by China years ago. So digital freedom is taking a pounding (while Wilders is being forgotten already). The security industry did not have their own security in order, that's more an internal Pearl Harbour. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-01/china-cyberspies-outwit-u-s-stealing-military-secrets.html http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-01/china-cyberspies-ou... Disclaimer: I'm Dutch and live there.
cinquemb 13y ago
I found this part to be interesting: "These companies may well be complicit in grave human rights violations. A criminal case against a French company for exactly this business behaviour is now under consideration of a Paris court and could set an important precedent for others. Can we hold companies and their executives accountable for complicity in human rights violations and creating security threats by knowingly selling digital arms to repressive regimes?" Should/Can we hold weapons manufactures accountable for helping aid nation states/organizations in their conquests or for individuals during crimes? Somehow this comes off to me as these tools are only ok for some ...hardly digital freedom. I also like how there is little (or no) discussion on about individuals and the role they should take in ensuring their digital freedom. I guess only nation states and corporations are the enlightend despots who must insure freedom upon us. Sounds kinda doublespeaky to me.
- sophacles 13y ago
  I don't know the details of the French case, but there is a valid question here: If I make some widget, that turns out is used widely, and happens to be used by an oppressive regime, am I helping commit opression? What about if I make a tool that really only has uses that look like oppression, but some of those cases are not opression and some are (say web filtering - parents can use it to protect their children, and opressive regimes can use it for censorship)? What if I create machine learning software that finds activists and determines the best time to arrest them? What if I work with a regime on custom extensions to a medical program that helps find the optimal torture times and methods to break people the fastest? At some point the use of "your freedom" is just a shield behind which one tries to hide complicity in removing others' freedom.
  - cinquemb 13y ago
    At some point the use of "your freedom" is just a shield behind which one tries to hide complicity in removing others' freedom. Unless one happens to find themselves on the side of the people who get to define what is "oppressive regime" and "others freedom". It's not as clear cut as one may think when you consider the perspectives of other societies and the people in power there (even as individuals who learn how to create their own tools for their own means become more powerful). The whole UN regulation issue makes light of this [http://blogs.cfr.org/patrick/2012/12/04/un-control-of-the-internet-an-idea-whose-time-will-never-come/ http://blogs.cfr.org/patrick/2012/12/04/un-control-of-the-in...].
lucb1e 13y ago
I never expected to click this link and see a politic party. Much less a Dutch one. Much less the party that I wanted to vote on - last elections I was allowed to vote for the first time - but didn't because my parents both voted something else, and I thought they'd probably know better. In hindsight I think choosing D66 would actually have been smarter...

28 points by denzil_correa 13y ago

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

A European Politician with Digital expertise. An interesting read with a grasp of the ongoing issues. Did I die and goto heaven?

EliRivers 13y ago
That's a common reaction when confronted with the Dutch :)
- jacquesm 13y ago
  We have Wilders to balance it out.
- smutticus 13y ago
  That's such an arrogant thing to say :(
  - EliRivers 13y ago
    Does it seem less arrogant when I tell you I'm not Dutch and I don't live in the Netherlands?
    - synctext 13y ago
      Political rhetoric reached peaks with Wikileaks, Stuxnet and now it seems Pentagon subcontractors got hacked by China years ago. So digital freedom is taking a pounding (while Wilders is being forgotten already). The security industry did not have their own security in order, that's more an internal Pearl Harbour. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-01/china-cyberspies-outwit-u-s-stealing-military-secrets.html http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-01/china-cyberspies-ou... Disclaimer: I'm Dutch and live there.

cinquemb 13y ago

I found this part to be interesting: "These companies may well be complicit in grave human rights violations. A criminal case against a French company for exactly this business behaviour is now under consideration of a Paris court and could set an important precedent for others. Can we hold companies and their executives accountable for complicity in human rights violations and creating security threats by knowingly selling digital arms to repressive regimes?" Should/Can we hold weapons manufactures accountable for helping aid nation states/organizations in their conquests or for individuals during crimes? Somehow this comes off to me as these tools are only ok for some ...hardly digital freedom. I also like how there is little (or no) discussion on about individuals and the role they should take in ensuring their digital freedom. I guess only nation states and corporations are the enlightend despots who must insure freedom upon us. Sounds kinda doublespeaky to me.

sophacles 13y ago
I don't know the details of the French case, but there is a valid question here: If I make some widget, that turns out is used widely, and happens to be used by an oppressive regime, am I helping commit opression? What about if I make a tool that really only has uses that look like oppression, but some of those cases are not opression and some are (say web filtering - parents can use it to protect their children, and opressive regimes can use it for censorship)? What if I create machine learning software that finds activists and determines the best time to arrest them? What if I work with a regime on custom extensions to a medical program that helps find the optimal torture times and methods to break people the fastest? At some point the use of "your freedom" is just a shield behind which one tries to hide complicity in removing others' freedom.
- cinquemb 13y ago
  At some point the use of "your freedom" is just a shield behind which one tries to hide complicity in removing others' freedom. Unless one happens to find themselves on the side of the people who get to define what is "oppressive regime" and "others freedom". It's not as clear cut as one may think when you consider the perspectives of other societies and the people in power there (even as individuals who learn how to create their own tools for their own means become more powerful). The whole UN regulation issue makes light of this [http://blogs.cfr.org/patrick/2012/12/04/un-control-of-the-internet-an-idea-whose-time-will-never-come/ http://blogs.cfr.org/patrick/2012/12/04/un-control-of-the-in...].

lucb1e 13y ago

I never expected to click this link and see a politic party. Much less a Dutch one. Much less the party that I wanted to vote on - last elections I was allowed to vote for the first time - but didn't because my parents both voted something else, and I thought they'd probably know better. In hindsight I think choosing D66 would actually have been smarter...