SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Germany is planning a new law giving authorities the right to look at private messages and fingerprint children as young as 6, the interior minister said on Wednesday after the last government gathering before a national election in September.
Ministers from central government and federal states said encrypted messaging services, such as WhatsApp and Signal, allow militants and criminals to evade traditional surveillance.
"We can't allow there to be areas that are practically outside the law," interior minister Thomas de Maiziere told reporters in the eastern town of Dresden.
It's not even certain that messages will be obvious to be... anything like they don't want to. A quick look how this can be done is the movie "The Saint" from 1997 where the contractor gets jobs that way. The hard quote is "where authorities install software on phones to relay messages before they are encrypted". Suppose the phone contains nothing of value. Not even the destination for the message because another unit transmits this via a analog transmission junk voice modulated with the actual real bits.
This panopticon idea is incredibly stupid technology-wise and a dangerous setup of society. The last time themes like this were current, neighbors told people in Armani uniforms that so-and-so did bad things so they could snatch their belongings or houses for themselves. And the whole society went down the drain. Oh wait, actually it was repeated after the mustache times with the sickle times. Both failed. This also shows why bootloader locking computer phones is detrimental to real security for real users. Because without it, enforced and silent installation will be hard.
And as for the motivation behind these moves. For some mysterious reason Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Czech, Slovakia, and Hungary seem to have been spared the latest string of violent attacks. How can that be? Nobel prize awaits! ;)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 15 2017, @07:14PM (13 children)
Or Germany could do some historical penance and welcome these migrants. Fingerprinting them is not so different from making them wear a star that says "Migrant". And Germans should relax about everyone having the right paperwork. "Ausweispflicht" is not a thing to be proud of.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 15 2017, @07:29PM (12 children)
Ezekiel 18:20 - long established concept my friend. See also [wikipedia.org]
Or they could, you know, not import individuals whose behaviour is an affront to Western Liberalism and encourage the existing population to get married and have children.
(Score: 4, Informative) by turgid on Thursday June 15 2017, @07:35PM (4 children)
Your comment is an affront to Western Liberalism.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 15 2017, @08:24PM (2 children)
Wrong! [opendemocracy.net] and Wrong! [telegraph.co.uk]
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 15 2017, @08:54PM (1 child)
A blog from a grad student whose thesis is that liberals want a welfare state and that can't work with immigrants. Yup, solid gold /s
And crime by immigrants saw an increase in Germany, but from specific groups. How does this make Turgid's response invalid again?
Don't forget this gem from your 2nd link to the telegraph:
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 15 2017, @10:07PM
Explain how a welfare state can work with mass immigration when even the most tepid predictions [technologyreview.com] are for a shrinking employment rate. Given that there's no reduction in GDP [mit.edu] due to an ageing and shrinking population; Where will the additional taxation revenue come from to support the welfare requirements for a massive increase in population?
Seems to me that the migrant crime rate would be even less if they screened individuals for employment suitability before letting them into the country. Given that we're talking economic migrants rather than refugees, they could create a set of conditions for entry and call it an "immigration policy" or something. What a pie-in-the-sky, fantastical idea huh? Not as if one of the core responsibilities granted to government under liberal ideals is to protect it's citizenry or anything?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 15 2017, @09:18PM
Yes your comment is double-plus-good, Comrade.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 15 2017, @07:43PM (6 children)
Refugees are a real problem. Your oh so christian solution is to turn your back on people in need? Send them back into a warzone where they will likely die? Gotta love the religious people displaying their complete lack of morality when it bumps against their nationalistic fervor.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 15 2017, @07:55PM (5 children)
Indeed. Economic migrants are also a problem and it's uncanny how people conflate the two.
I'm not religious, I simply understand basic concepts. A child is not legally liable for the actions of his parents.
Actual male refugees would bring their families, few arrivals have done so. Not like there's a 12:1 financial ratio in favour of helping refugees closer to home - for every refugee we import we could support twelve at a refugee camp in the Middle East.
(Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 15 2017, @08:46PM (4 children)
Don't quote scripture then, plenty of examples not from the bible.
The future is more open borders, we're in the awkward and painful middle stages where the global economy is getting sorted out. Yes we need to be careful handling the issues, yes illegal immigrants can cause problems, but you scaredy cats are blowing it way out of proportion. Tribal nationalism, not a very pretty picture and 90% of the time supported by bigots who simply don't like "those people" and try to cover their bigotry with more agreeable reasons.
Refugee camps are often very disturbing solutions with high crime rates and they offer the people no options for the future. It isn't even necessarily cheaper, the ongoing costs would not be offset by the economic activity of the refugees themselves. "Not in my backyard!" indeed.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 15 2017, @09:18PM
AFAIK, that's the origin of the concept. As a lifelong atheist I have no problem quoting scripture when it's relevant, if you can proved an earlier example I'll happily use that.
You're making a whole bunch of assumptions there. The problems with open border policies and mass migration may well prove insurmountable. [spectator.co.uk]
Exactly like migrant areas in the west then? Camps are temporary, when the persecution and violence these poor people are fleeing ceases they have the opportunity to return and rebuild. Not so once they've been adopted as "human capital" by the West.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 16 2017, @06:49AM
Some scriptures are wise, a lot of them are a not. When there's wisdom it's wise to not discriminate based on source. Wise people discriminate on content instead.
Allowing criminal, disease ridden, theocratic nut jobs that works constantly to overthrow the liberal and free countries is not a good future. And people in Europe are realizing this in greater numbers. So while open borders for people with qualification and manners may work. For people that can't behave it will not work and either it will be prevented by law or by less pleasant means. It's a equation without a solution.
They have no future in Europe either except than as leeches. Which will not be accepted in the long term. And they still get no future in Europe anyway. Brains, education, manners and respect is required to even try.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday June 16 2017, @02:31PM (1 child)
So I shouldn't quote the Silmarillon, if I'm not a worshiper of the Valar? What are the rules again?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 16 2017, @04:55PM
Well don't get bent out of shape when people call you geek or nerd after you do.