←back to thread

568 points layer8 | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
ineedasername ◴[] No.45768131[source]
I’m continually astounded that so many people, faced with a societal problem, reflexively turn to “Hmmm, perhaps if we monitored and read and listened to every single thing that every person does, all of the time…”

As though it would 1) be a practical possibility and 2) be effective.

Compounding the issue is that the more technology can solve #1, the more these people fixate on it as the solution without regards to the lack of #2.

I wish there were a way, once and for all, to prevent this ridiculous idea from taking hold over and over again. If I could get a hold of such people when these ideas were in their infancy… perhaps I should monitor everything everyone does and watch for people considering the same as a solution to their problem… ah well, no, still don’t see how that follows logically as a reasonable solution.

replies(17): >>45768311 #>>45768758 #>>45768812 #>>45768845 #>>45768873 #>>45769030 #>>45769192 #>>45769801 #>>45769868 #>>45769961 #>>45770005 #>>45770264 #>>45770801 #>>45770827 #>>45771089 #>>45772424 #>>45776034 #
usernomdeguerre ◴[] No.45768311[source]
The issue is that there is a place where this model ~is working. It's in China and Russia. The GFW, its Russian equivalent, and the national security laws binding all of their tech companies and public discussion do exactly these things in a way that has allowed their leadership to go unchallenged for decades now.

The rest of the world isn't stupid or silly for suggesting these policies. They're following a proven effective model for the outcomes they are looking for.

We do ourselves a disservice by acting like there is some inherent flaw in it.

replies(18): >>45768496 #>>45768599 #>>45768644 #>>45769338 #>>45769392 #>>45769722 #>>45770019 #>>45770099 #>>45770285 #>>45770405 #>>45770530 #>>45770788 #>>45771104 #>>45771169 #>>45771319 #>>45771623 #>>45771694 #>>45774191 #
Lio ◴[] No.45769392[source]
Are you seriously trying to suggest that monitoring of all private messages in Russia and China has stopped child abuse images from being shared?

That is preposterous.

We dismiss the suggestion of removing the right to privacy precisely because it doesn’t stop these crimes but it does support political repression.

The crimes go on, only criticism of the government for failing to address them is stopped.

EDIT: the more I reread your post the more I suspect this might be exactly the point you are making. Sorry, too subtle for me first thing in the morning. Need more coffee.

replies(2): >>45769441 #>>45769453 #
inglor_cz ◴[] No.45769441[source]
C'mon, we all know that the main reason for such laws is controlling dissent.

Allegedly, Spanish police is a great supporter of Chat Control, not because of CP, but because of them wanting to spy on Catalan and Basque separatists more effectively.

replies(1): >>45770755 #
1. swiftcoder ◴[] No.45770755[source]
Is Catalan/Basque separatism still a thing, in the sense of violent outcomes (a la ETA)? I have the impression that it's become a fairly civil process (more along the lines of the Scottish or Bavarian independence movements)
replies(1): >>45773724 #
2. inglor_cz ◴[] No.45773724[source]
Catalan separatism was never violent and the Basques concluded peace with Madrid, which holds. So it is all political.

Several Catalan politicians were prosecuted for holding an "illegal referendum" and had to hide in Belgium for some time.

replies(1): >>45776853 #
3. 1718627440 ◴[] No.45776853[source]
I think when we want to get rid of violence to change borders (war), we must allow borders to be changed peacefully.