News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Times Pulls Article Blaming Encryption in Paris Terror Attack. Parent comment

Re:Times Pulls Article Blaming Encryption in Paris Terror At... by pfg on Tuesday November 17, 2015 @09:21AM (#10581168)
> You can downvote me but you don't get a downvote in governments around the world when they outlaw real encryption.

I'm pretty sure you can downvote them by voting for representatives that do not support such laws. At least if you're in some kind of democracy.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Times Pulls Article Blaming Encryption in Paris Terror At... by vonmoltke on Tuesday November 17, 2015 @10:44AM (#10581765)
There should be a name for this fallacy. This is easy to say for any issue in isolation, but what is a voter to do when they only have two or three choices? When there are dozens of issues at any given time the chances of having a candidate that aligns with you on all of them is nil.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Times Pulls Article Blaming Encryption in Paris Terror At... by veidr on Tuesday November 17, 2015 @09:45AM (#10581325)
Unfortunately that process isn't as easy as clicking the little triangle, and hence only 4 out of 10 eligible "moderators" participate[1]...

[1]: https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publicatio...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Times Pulls Article Blaming Encryption in Paris Terror At... by wfo on Tuesday November 17, 2015 @01:18PM (#10582929)
You can vote for either a) the representative on the one side who supports such laws or b) the representative on the other side who supports such laws or c) throw your vote away and let the majority of people who don't understand/care about this issue decide between (a) and (b).

Voting is not a solution to a problem like this and is generally very ineffective in the US.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Times Pulls Article Blaming Encryption in Paris Terror At... by Bud on Tuesday November 17, 2015 @03:58PM (#10583900)
Not in a gerrymandered district. It won't do you any good, even if you presuppose the existence of a pro-encryption candidate, which is a bad supposition.
[ Parent | on HN ]