Mastodawn

@Em0nM4stodon
What a silly argument.

No one is banning encryption. Demanding platforms stop crimes, even if encrypted, is no different than cops stopping crimes behind closed doors.

A crime behind any veil is still a crime and should be stopped.

Patrizia

@TCatInReality @Em0nM4stodon it's banning effective, meaningful encryption. What is the value of encryption if anything that is sent must be scanned before it is allowed to be encrypted?

@patrizia @Em0nM4stodon
Really?

Something must work 100% of the time, even if that facilitates crime, to be of *any* value?

Well then, going back to the door analogy. Let's get rid of doors bc police have a habit of breaking them down during raids. SMH

Patrizia May 11, 2023

@TCatInReality @Em0nM4stodon It's not just undermining encryption for criminals. It's undermining it for everybody in all circumstances. It removes the ability for citizens to communicate in such a way that their human right to privacy is protected.

@patrizia @Em0nM4stodon
Yes, this exception applies to all. But no right is absolutely unrestricted, not speech, guns, life, etc.

If the exception is limited, proportional, necessary for the common good, then the exception proves the rule.

@TCatInReality @patrizia @Em0nM4stodon Let me give you a real life example - I live in Paris, we're getting biometric video surveillance because "Olympics".

I live between two landmarks and half the government in between.

The system gets triggered by some real mundane shit like walking too fast, hanging around in an area "too long", or "acting suspiciously". All of which I can do by going to the supermarket or sitting in a park.

1 / ?

@TCatInReality @patrizia @Em0nM4stodon if I ping that enough times, I can probably find myself with a Fiche S (basically the entire state will keep an eye on me).

This can mean that I can't participate in protests - which is my right to do in a free society.

I will have problems with the police at every encounter.

I could find that my right to live in this country are taken away when I come to renew my documents.

All this because I because I don't get my groceries delivered 2 / 2

@TCatInReality @patrizia @Em0nM4stodon 3 / 3

Breaking it for everybody makes everybody a criminal with serious consequences if the system fucks it up.

Which it will, there are already stories of people who have been booted from Google for having perfectly normal photos of their own children or in one case, sending a photo to a doctor to diagnose the seriousness of a rash - because of a default setting in Google Photos

@kc @patrizia @Em0nM4stodon
Wow. That sucks

And I bet over the next year they refine the system because the French police don't want to waste time pursuing people who buy their groceries.

I'm not saying there won't be cases of abuse. But your best defense is a democratically responsive government that wants good processes and sane security.

@TCatInReality @patrizia @Em0nM4stodon Would this be the same French police who have been arresting people en masse for no reason what so ever and even goes as far as sending some of this people to court for the case to be dismissed ? https://archive.is/HyHEh

France is allegedly the beacon of democracy but here we are with a government being warned about problematic handling of human rights, in some cases by by itself https://twitter.com/CNCDH/status/1638780729948614656

1 / 2

@TCatInReality @patrizia @Em0nM4stodon Can you see why putting the onus on the government to "be good" to attack a small percentage of use cases is a tremendously terrible idea ? 2 /2

@kc @patrizia @Em0nM4stodon
I'm not there and unfamiliar with the cases you mention.

@TCatInReality @patrizia @Em0nM4stodon so what's your argument or point here ?

@kc @patrizia @Em0nM4stodon
I've done dozens of posts tonight on this topic. Feel free to browse my feed, if you want to understand my point.

Misuse Case May 11, 2023

@TCatInReality @kc @patrizia @Em0nM4stodon Ah, I see your problem right there, you think the state surveillance and enforcement apparatus wants to err on the side of respecting people’s rights.

My brother in Christ, if they wanted to do that, they wouldn’t want to do biometric surveillance on everyone in Paris or run a panopticon on all encrypted communications.

@MisuseCase @kc @patrizia
No, I don't think they want to err on the side of human right.

I specifically said they don't want to waste their time on people who go out to buy groceries.

Sure, they'll suck up all the data they can. But it's extremely unlikely he gets deported for going out to the shops. It doesn't help their goal of accruing power or wealth.

Misuse Case May 11, 2023

@TCatInReality @kc @patrizia You say that logically it does not help their goal of accruing power or wealth but that doesn’t really matter. Oppressive police states with pervasive surveillance always have collateral damage (lots of it) that they don’t care to reduce, and as a noncitizen this person has a high likelihood of becoming collateral damage.

@kc @patrizia @Em0nM4stodon
So, the system already f's it up - and that's the system you're arguing should be left as is?

Amadi Lovelace May 11, 2023

@TCatInReality @patrizia @Em0nM4stodon so because sometimes criminals might use encrypted communication for privacy, no one gets to use encrypted communication for privacy. That’s the end point of your argument.

@amaditalks @patrizia @Em0nM4stodon
No, that's not my argument at all

There are dozens of posts today explaining my view on this, if you really care.

I'm done for the day addressing reductionist clapback. Have a nice e day.

Amadi Lovelace May 12, 2023

@TCatInReality @patrizia @Em0nM4stodon I didn’t say that it was your argument, I said, it was the endpoint of your argument. But by all means, pretend that you didn’t understand that.