How Signal Walks the Line Between Anarchism and Pragmatism

Re:How Signal Walks the Line Between Anarchism and Pragmatism by Buttons840 on Monday July 24, 2023 @11:35PM (#36857555)

> In just the last 20-30 years we've gone from "if the government wants to know your speech, they are a warrant(-ish) away from getting it"

Couldn't people just talk quietly and nobody would ever know what they said to each other? Humanity has survived how long under this condition?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How Signal Walks the Line Between Anarchism and Pragmatism by didntcheck on Tuesday July 25, 2023 @07:20AM (#36860678)

To be fair, it was still hard to hide "metadata". If you met someone in person, or sent a letter, then it would be hard to conceal that from someone surveiling you

The difference was they had to be actively targeting you beforehand, and it was an ongoing high expense per target. Now we bulk collect data on the basis that someone might be guilty in the future

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How Signal Walks the Line Between Anarchism and Pragmatism by gcanyon on Tuesday July 25, 2023 @05:45PM (#36870010)

Wire-tapping is a thing. Sensitive microphones are a thing. "The Thing" is a thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thing_(listening_device)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How Signal Walks the Line Between Anarchism and Pragmatism by Buttons840 on Tuesday July 25, 2023 @06:27PM (#36870532)

Again, you act like not being able to wire-tap is a new thing. How long did humanity survive without wires?

The ability to have a private conversation that remains a secret forever is a fundamental human right that goes back a hundred thousand years.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How Signal Walks the Line Between Anarchism and Pragmatism by gcanyon on Tuesday July 25, 2023 @06:34PM (#36870625)

I'm not sure we agree on the definition of "fundamental human right" -- are you using it to mean "an aspect of fundamental reality"?

[ Parent | on HN ]