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: 2) by NotSanguine on Wednesday December 13 2017, @09:26AM (1 child)
Really? what exactly should I do, oh wise one? I don't see you making any relevant or worthwhile suggestions yourself.
I have voted in every election (primary and general) for candidates that I've chosen through my own research and information gathered from multiple sources (including voting records and stated positions) and, you know, actual facts, for more than thirty years.
I don't buy into the builshit. In fact, I called it out by name. which is more than I can say for you. You can't even be bothered to make an coherent argument as to how to help our fellow Americans to educate themselves and make better choices. That I do so is good. You haven't even claimed to do so, although you implied as much. And if we were the only voters, that would be great. How do you propose convincing the other ~235 million eligible voters to do so as well?
I actually did make some suggestions, but you apparently chose to ignore them.
Your posts added nothing of value except to complain about me. That's not a reasonable discussion or argument. And when asked what *you* would do about the issues, you just make a fact-free and completely contradictory attack:
It's clear you don't wish to have a measured, reasoned discussion. Or even a discussion. You, apparently seem to feel the need to be negative with others. Is that due to a trauma in your past? If so, I'm sorry for you.
I'd be happy to have a discussion with you, if and when you actually wish to engage in a constructive way. Until then, please be good to yourself [pelicanparts.com] and try to keep your blood pressure in check.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Friday December 15 2017, @04:14AM
I don't see you making any relevant or worthwhile suggestions yourself.
I told you already, it's on the voters' back to look out for themselves. They are the root of the power. Only they can reduce the value of the campaign dollar to exactly zero. Propaganda works by choice. The voters choose to believe against all evidence, don't blame the liars for their success.
Whatever you do personally, I never claimed to know, and I don't care. I responded to your post. And you don't explain how you're going to implement your agenda and who is going to do it. So the internet is full of bullshit, so what? What's yer plan, Stan? Are we going to play the Handicapper General?
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..