←back to thread

Chat Control Must Be Stopped – Now

(threema.ch)
960 points andrew918277 | 3 comments | 18 Jun 24 08:49 UTC | HN request time: 0.625s | source
Show context
romankolpak ◴[18 Jun 24 10:46 UTC] No.40716163[source]▶
I’m sorry if this is a stupid question, but I want to ask it because I see the same sentiment across HN and other forums and I’m legitimately confused.

If we don’t hijack privacy in messaging, how do we fight crime happening on a message platform? If government doesn’t have access to message contents, what’s stopping criminals from using the platform and never get tracked down? Or proven guilty, since all the proof is safely encrypted? Aren’t we hurting ourselves by being so obsessed with privacy? Again, I apologize for ignorance and am curious

replies(16): >>40716180 #>>40716181 #>>40716191 #>>40716194 #>>40716221 #>>40716267 #>>40716277 #>>40716364 #>>40716453 #>>40716456 #>>40716500 #>>40716705 #>>40717026 #>>40722811 #>>40724777 #>>40724839 #
1. jdthedisciple ◴[18 Jun 24 11:04 UTC] No.40716277[source]▶
You realize criminals can stack infinitely many layers of encryption onto any compromised (govt-controlled) channel right? So how is "Chat Control" supposed to be the solution??
replies(1): >>40716493 #
2. tzs ◴[18 Jun 24 11:31 UTC] No.40716493[source]▶
> So how is "Chat Control" supposed to be the solution??

Who said it is supposed to be the solution?

Almost no crime problems have a the solution. Instead reducing crime is almost always a matter of a variety of measures that each make the crime a little less likely.

replies(1): >>40726865 #
3. account42 ◴[19 Jun 24 10:30 UTC] No.40726865[source]▶
Which is why we also need to look at the cost of the measures to non-criminals, which in this case is extremely high for most likely little gain.