5 ms·
Are you saying the right to share information without surveillance is on the same footing as the right to sell drugs? And even then, is it wise to address your
by pfraze 13y ago
Are you saying the right to share information without surveillance is on the same footing as the right to sell drugs? And even then, is it wise to address your disagreement with a law by creating a GitHub repo that details your plan to break it?
I'm not advocating compliance here. I'm just challenging this idea that we can beat the state through technical prowess, or that we should do it without being pressed into extraordinary circumstances. It's not just unwise, it's (regarding the "technical prowess") flat incorrect.
- agscala 13y agoWhy should the right to share information be on a different level than selling drugs? You can sell (share) powerful information. You can share information that would cause far, far more damage than any drugs will.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- jlgreco 13y agoDrugs are a canary in the coal mine. If you lack the ability to share drugs over a medium without surveillance, then you know that you lack the ability to share information over a medium without surveillance. If you can't say "mail me three marijuanas please" without somebody listening in, then you can't say anything without somebody listening in. There is no such thing as a system that provides privacy only for legal activities. Therefore if you want to fight for the freedom and ability to share information without surveillance, then you must design systems that can, incidentally or otherwise, be used to share drugs (and you must fight attempts to surveil existing systems.)