News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on My interview with Steven Levy re. leaking of my Facebook Goodbye post. Parent comment

Re:My interview with Steven Levy re. leaking of my Facebook ... by CamperBob2 on Tuesday October 26, 2021 @02:36PM (#29004393)
There's a gambler's fallacy at work here, though. Our Fourth Amendment right to encrypted private communications is so important that if we lose it (or give it up), any future wins in areas like corporate transparency, monopoly regulation, and net neutrality won't ultimately matter. We won't have the freedom needed to benefit from them.

To the extent Haugen disagrees, she's not on "our side."

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:My interview with Steven Levy re. leaking of my Facebook ... by torstenvl on Thursday October 28, 2021 @10:00AM (#29026211)
Sorry, what clause in the Fourth Amendment talks about encryption? Thanks in advance.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:My interview with Steven Levy re. leaking of my Facebook ... by CamperBob2 on Thursday October 28, 2021 @01:42PM (#29028805)
The plain text reads, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated."

It's not reasonable to outlaw the tools needed to exercise a fundamental right. Not OK for the 1st, not OK for the 2nd, and not OK for the 4th. Encryption was already an old technology at the time of the Constitution's authorship. If they had wanted to regulate or outlaw it, they were free to say so. They didn't.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:My interview with Steven Levy re. leaking of my Facebook ... by torstenvl on Thursday October 28, 2021 @03:54PM (#29030971)
> Encryption was already an old technology at the time of the Constitution's authorship...

...so if they had wanted to guarantee a right to it, they were free to say so.

But they didn't.

Despite clearly contemplating privacy.

[ Parent | on HN ]