←back to thread

658 points transpute | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
Animats ◴[] No.35844753[source]
There's an upside to this. It can be used politically as an argument against backdoors for "lawful access"[1] to encrypted data.

[1] https://www.fbi.gov/about/mission/lawful-access

replies(6): >>35844809 #>>35844880 #>>35844886 #>>35845051 #>>35845431 #>>35850810 #
voidfunc ◴[] No.35844809[source]
The argument doesn't matter because the federal government and politicians don't give a shit about facts
replies(2): >>35844873 #>>35845768 #
hilbert42 ◴[] No.35844873[source]
Until their PCs get hacked and their medical and psychiatrists' notes about them become front page news.
replies(3): >>35844896 #>>35845322 #>>35845924 #
bb88 ◴[] No.35845924[source]
Remember when the CIA hacked the Senate? No?

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/01/world/senate-intelligence...

I'm pretty sure a lot of lawmakers still take this shit seriously.

replies(1): >>35846169 #
1. Spooky23 ◴[] No.35846169{3}[source]
Maybe some of them, in committee roles.

The weak link is the campaigns.

replies(1): >>35846960 #
2. __d ◴[] No.35846960[source]
The weak link is the voters.

We continue to elect charismatic fools (and sometimes charismatic criminals) because we're charmed, or scared, or bewildered, or just too damned tired to care.

Until that stops, there's really no justification for expecting anything rational to come from our leadership.

replies(1): >>35849037 #
3. fuzzfactor ◴[] No.35849037[source]
Not all that charismatic, more like empty social climbers.

Especially the unethical and downright criminals, who put all their effort into putting on a fake legitimate facade.