SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The new FBI Director Christopher Wray has been repeating the broken rhetoric of the Crypto Wars:
In recent testimony before Congress, the director of the FBI has again highlighted what the government sees as the problem of easy-to-use, on-by-default, strong encryption.
In prepared remarks from last Thursday, FBI Director Christopher Wray said that encryption presents a "significant challenge to conducting lawful court-ordered access," he said, again using the longstanding government moniker "Going Dark."
The statement was just one portion of his testimony about the agency's priorities for the coming year.
The FBI and its parent agency, the Department of Justice, have recently stepped up public rhetoric about the so-called dangers of "Going Dark." In recent months, both Wray and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein have given numerous public statements about this issue.
Remember to use encryption irresponsibly, and stay salty, my FBI friends.
Previously: FBI Chief Calls for National Talk Over Encryption vs. Safety
Federal Court Rules That the FBI Does Not Have to Disclose Name of iPhone Hacking Vendor
PureVPN Logs Helped FBI Net Alleged Cyberstalker
FBI Failed to Access 7,000 Encrypted Mobile Devices
Great, Now There's "Responsible Encryption"
FBI Bemoans Phone Encryption After Texas Shooting, but Refuses Apple's Help
DOJ: Strong Encryption That We Don't Have Access to is "Unreasonable"
(Score: 1) by ewk on Tuesday December 12 2017, @02:06PM (28 children)
So, tell me: How did he get to the point of being able to start all this? Oh yeah... taxes that co-provided for his upbringing, education, health, etc. etc...
Although from the page you provided, it seems his mental health could use some improvement. But that's probably a matter of opinion.
Besides, pretty stupid of him to use rectangular pieces of paper and round pieces of metal... Those would not be my choice if I were inclined to mint a currency.
The outward appearance simply looks too similar to regular money. So the counterfeiting charge and conviction seem about right.
Really, pissing of the system that actually enabled you to be where you are today is not the best way to change it.
You simply don't shit where you eat.
I don't always react, but when I do, I do it on SoylentNews
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 12 2017, @02:25PM (1 child)
Taxpaying begets taxpayers, in other words. You were born a taxpayer, and so it remains justified in using any force necessary to keep you a taxpayer. Feel free to substitute in the word "slavery" if it helps.
But now I see that you were just being facetious all along. Well played! Well played.
(Score: 1) by ewk on Tuesday December 12 2017, @02:32PM
Just you keep thinking that.
I don't always react, but when I do, I do it on SoylentNews
(Score: 1, Insightful) by khallow on Tuesday December 12 2017, @05:09PM (24 children)
I agree with the AC. This is the language of the slave master. I did this thing for you way back when. So now, I should own you for the rest of your life. He got to this point by making his own choices. Sure, the things you mentioned helped to some degree, but it was his choices that got him where he was.
FTFY.
In a democracy, doing or giving stuff without a mutual agreement (and no, "the social contract" doesn't count) creates no obligation in the people you do it for. If you don't like the consequences, then the only real choices are to accept that or to change how you do such things. Those other people have no obligation to change their behavior, merely because you have an opinion on what they should be doing.
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by ewk on Tuesday December 12 2017, @05:31PM (17 children)
Not slavery, just simply being part of the social framework/contract (sorry... still using that word, even if you do not like it) that enabled you to achieve something (I assume nobody put a gun against your head to get an education and so on)... So really, like if you don't like it, just GTFO... Rumour has it Somalia still has plenty of room and possibilities.
As for democracy... that ship already sailed with the Romans, about 2000 years ago.
I don't always react, but when I do, I do it on SoylentNews
(Score: 2, Interesting) by khallow on Tuesday December 12 2017, @06:54PM (13 children)
I would find it more convenient if you GTFO instead. Love-it-or-leave-it is fine when your dudes are in power. But in a genuine democracy, that won't always be the case. It's better to have a society that can handle dissent, including unlawful dissent, rather than one that tries to cleanse society of ungoodthink.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 12 2017, @07:44PM (8 children)
No one is cleansing anyone, what is wrong with you??
Racists and bigots are now shunned quite heavily, the majority of people now realize that such prejudice is DUMB! Please, elaborate on the cleansing for "ungoodthink", I'm curious as to what stories I've missed that could possibly be so construed.
(Score: 2, Flamebait) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday December 12 2017, @08:24PM (1 child)
He's angry because calling people Nazis when they wear Nazi regalia and call for blacks and Jews to be killed is allowed. Hallow is fucking nuts; just read his post history.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday December 12 2017, @08:45PM
Yes, read my post history [soylentnews.org] rather than take someone's word for it.
Moving on, what happens when the unpopular people aren't racists, but people who want to use strong encryption? Or who merely want to be free? And the "GTFO" strategy only works, if the authorities will allow you to leave. That is one of the first things taken away in a tyranny.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday December 12 2017, @08:32PM (5 children)
I quoted the relevant statement. Love it or leave it!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 12 2017, @08:44PM (4 children)
Sooooo having a negative opinion about someone else is "cleansing"? Trigger harder little snowflake.
(Score: 2, Informative) by khallow on Tuesday December 12 2017, @09:02PM (3 children)
Why do you think "if you don't like it, just GTFO" merely means having a negative opinion? It's passive-aggressive for "We don't want your kind here, get out." We already have groups that have gone beyond that sentiment to actually advocating for other groups to leave. For example, I have a whiny AC [soylentnews.org] who wants to deport "whiteys" because "you all" want to deport Mexicans from North America. Seriously.
And this sentiment applies to any behavior that is considered deviant such as the topic of the story. Want to use strong encryption? Somalia's open.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 12 2017, @09:11PM
Geez Louise, Khallow! Some mouth-breathing netizen tells you to "get out" and you assume that it's huge conspiracy? Who is this "we" of which you speak?
Haven't you taken your haldol yet today?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 12 2017, @09:25PM (1 child)
You do realize that someone saying "deport whiteys" is an attempt at getting you to realize what "deport mexicans" sounds like? For all the vitriol that comes from conservative groups it is shocking how thin your skins are. Would your feelz be better if we changed it to "If you don't like it GTFO or support legislation for change". Is that better? Do you feel less threatened?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 13 2017, @10:04AM
Perhaps you should use plain language then, rather than try to resort to mental tricks which have a high probability of backfiring on you. Likewise, I don't recommend teaching people not to hit others by punching them in the face.
Not really. That's akin to being in a casino and being told that if I don't like the odds on the game I find myself playing, my choices are to 'GTFO or ask for a rules change'. The option to simply stop playing never seems to cross your lips...
(Score: 1) by ewk on Tuesday December 12 2017, @09:15PM (3 children)
Dude, believe me... I am most definitely NOT one of those in power. Trust me, if I were in power things would be soooo much different :-)
But lately I am getting just a wheee bit irritated about seemingly over-privileged whiners that take the investment society made in them for granted and assume they can only cut the cords THEY want.
Sorry, but it does not work that way.
I don't always react, but when I do, I do it on SoylentNews
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday December 12 2017, @10:41PM (2 children)
One of the costs of "investment" is that they have no obligation to show gratitude. To accept the investment is to accept the costs of the investment. It's something like the "love it or leave it" argument that happened earlier in this thread. Choices come with consequences. If you choose to have a certain public service, then you need to accept the consequences of the public service, much as if you choose to live in a place with laws that you don't approve of, you have a variety of choices (including illegal disobedience and GTFO), but also consequences associated with those choices.
It is only fair that if they have to face consequences for choices, so should you.
(Score: 1) by ewk on Wednesday December 13 2017, @10:18AM (1 child)
Thank you for proving my point about the whiners who take everything for granted.
It is indeed a choice to be a leech.
It seems we really do have a difference of opinion here about how one should behave in society.
I don't always react, but when I do, I do it on SoylentNews
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday December 13 2017, @05:15PM
My view is the more things your society/government does to people for which they hypothetically should feel gratitude, the less gratitude which will be received in turn.
(Score: 2) by urza9814 on Wednesday December 13 2017, @02:16PM (2 children)
Not sure what country we're talking about here, but in the US they pretty much do -- dropping out before age 18 is illegal and if you do it then *someone* is going to end up in jail. More likely the gun would be to your parents' heads, but that seems a pretty minor distinction...
(Score: 1) by ewk on Thursday December 14 2017, @09:50AM (1 child)
Really? Having to "visit an educational institution" equals "getting an education" ?
They might force you (indirectly) to do the first, but the second?
I don't always react, but when I do, I do it on SoylentNews
(Score: 2) by urza9814 on Thursday December 14 2017, @02:22PM
Really? You think a child as young as six years old is going to make a conscious decision to just ignore what they're being told for around eight hours per day every single day for the next twelve years? They're surely going to absorb *something* in that time.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 12 2017, @05:49PM (5 children)
You apparently don't understand what Democracy is and instead confuse it for complete and total personal freedom.
It is truly difficult to understand how a person gets to such a ridiculous point. But then again people believe Jesus resurrected and we celebrate his "rebirth" with rabbit eggs??? lol. So I guess it is easy to understand, all humans can be stupid and sometimes unbelievably so.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by khallow on Tuesday December 12 2017, @06:46PM (3 children)
Does civil disobedience have a place in Democracy. Yes or no?
Well, it helps if you try to understand other viewpoints.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 12 2017, @08:52PM (2 children)
Civil disobedience has a place anywhere it is called for. Unjust laws should be pushed back. The price of such disobedience is always some form of punishment, and it is up to the rest of society to either agree that your punishment is justified or not. None of this has a bearing on Democracy. Go ahead, disobey the IRS, we will see how much support you get for it.
I understand your viewpoint entirely. I find it incredibly naive. I would say "stupid" but it is obvious you are capable, so I'll stick to naive about how the human society works. All I can figure is that you operate on some very basic principles that you think would magically work our for the best. I also presume understanding human social behavior is not your strong point.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by khallow on Tuesday December 12 2017, @09:31PM (1 child)
Pretty mealy mouthed way to say that civil disobedience you don't agree with should be punished. The rest of society is not always going to be on your side. And it has quite the bearing on democracy because protest, even of the law-breaking sort, is a key way to communicate and generate support for your beliefs.
The problem here is that in democracies, people and do have different opinions on how things should work. Naive or not, their ideas aren't discredited merely because you disagree with them.
What is there to understand here? The state cracked down on a guy for protesting by not paying taxes. There's no social behavior complexity in that.
My story starts with the pathetic rationalization for that action:
This is one of the classic way abuses of the state are rationalized: we raised you, we own you. Maybe this particular guy's protest was complete bullshit, but the logic applies to all tax protests, not merely the bullshit ones. I bet this most tax protesters would disagree on the efficacy of government spending on their childhoods.
A final remark is the complete absence of any consideration in this thread for why there are tax protests: maybe the protesters don't want to pay for corporate welfare, maybe they don't want to pay for wars, maybe they don't want to pay because other people can't get their shit together. It's remarkable how blithely people speak of the good of taxation while ignoring the grievance problems of it.
(Score: 2) by urza9814 on Wednesday December 13 2017, @02:22PM
Have you ever participated in any civil disobedience? Going to jail is often an integral part of the strategy. And that doesn't work if you go to jail and nobody cares -- it really only works if the general public think it's unjust that you're going to jail for it, and are prompted to take action as a result. So yeah, he's correct on that, democracy is majority rule, and if the majority doesn't back you then your civil disobedience is just a crime. There's a difference between civil disobedience and regular protest -- if it's not illegal, it's not disobedience.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Tuesday December 12 2017, @08:12PM
Representative tyranny is not going to stop the use of strong encryption. #Resist
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 13 2017, @04:41PM
You're a well programmed dipshit, none of us chose to be a part of this system.