In this case, protecting one’s privacy and encrypting communications is no longer merely suspect, but participates of constituting a “clandestine behavior”, a way of concealing criminal intentions. In several memos, the DGSI keeps on trying to demonstrate how the use of tools such as Signal, Tor, Proton, Silence, etc., would be evidence of a desire to hide compromising elements. And on top of this, as we denounced last June, the DGSI justifies the absence of evidence of a terrorist project by the use of encryption tools itself. According to them, if they lack of elements proving a terrorist intent, it’s because those proofs are necessarily hold back in those much-vaunted encrypted and inaccessible messages. In reaction of such absurd vicious circle, lawyers of a person charged denounced the fact that “here, the absence of evidence becomes an evidence itself“.
how the use of tools such as Signal, Tor, Proton, Silence, etc., would be evidence of a desire to hide compromising elements.
I tried to write about how stupid this statement is with logical explanation but this doesn’t even deserve that. If that goes anywhere near the actual law enforcement policy, that is no longer a free country.
I offer an alternative service to having a wallet. I securely hold on to the contents of it and let you use the cards in it whenever you want, helps protect from theft, etc.
Oh you don’t want to use this service because there’s no need for someone else to have access to your wallet? What are you hiding? Clearly you’d be using the service if you weren’t also doing something illegal.
I’d extend the metaphor further to highlight that there’s no such thing as a secure backdoor, but this is just the same shit police-state authoritarianism we’ve been seeing grow in the UK since Thatcher—surveil fucking everyone, in every way possible whilst they do absolutely anything; because you’re not a citizen, you’re just a criminal or potential criminal.
And we’ve got a load of shitty news outlets making idiots clap every time their rights are eroded, because this time it’ll stop the paedos and terrorists for good. Like all the other times.
The table in the ACLU report is kind of interesting. I mean, I was confused about the could be shared with law enforcement and the could be used to discipline my friends but then seeing the Could be used to identify trans/reproductive health makes those amounts completely understandable as well as the undocumented statement.
I always feel like I’m being watched 32%
How it could be used to discipline me or my friends 27%
What our school and companies they contract with do with the data (such as sell it, analyze it, etc.) 26%
How it limits what resources I feel I can access online 24%
Could be shared with law enforcement 22%
Could be used against me in the future by a college or an employer 21%
Could be used to identify students seeking reproductive health care (such as contraception or abortion care) 21%
Could be used to identify students seeking gender-affirming care (such as transgender students seeking hormones) 18%
Could be used against immigrant students, especially those who are undocumented 18%
How it limits what I say online 17%
Could be used to “out” LGBTQIA+ students 13%
I have no concerns regarding surveillance in my school 27%
`
Source: YouGov. School Surveillance, fielded October 20-26, 2022. Commissioned by ACLU TABLE 1 Students’ Concerns About School Surveillance
Hell, I finished school over a decade ago now, but even as an adult, I feel like I'm being constantly watched. This kind of overreaching, omnipresent surveillance is genuinely not good for individuals and by extension, society at large. Human beings do not act naturally when they feel their every move is being watched. Anxiety, distrust, paranoia, depression, etc. can all manifest, and it scares me to know that this kind of "for your safety" surveillance has become so normalized.
It isn't normal. It is affecting the average person's mental health, even if they don't know it. It is affecting society at a very base level as a result. What a world...
Note: Found the one big thing I wanted in the ACLU stuff but I’m not reading through the Vice News report at this moment: As Vice News reported, “The few published studies looking into the impacts of [student surveillance] tools indicate that they may have the effect [of] breaking down trust relationships within schools and discouraging adolescents from reaching out for help.”83 Ironically, the same tools the EdTech Surveillance industry is promoting as a means for identifying students in need of help may actually be dis-couraging those students from reaching out to school officials and other adults for help when they need it.
It is crazy how in a country where everyone sues everyone all the time things like that happen. I had assumed that such a system would lead to a more robust system where every manager to ceo is vetting their business against these problems to not get sued. Apparently the liberal system of suing anyone all the time does not at all replaces a governmental body that defines strong consumer protection rights. Reading this, Turbotax and Wells Fargo News teaches me that a suing society is not cleansing itself from predatory behaviour.
Here is a list of the top 5 most litigious countries by capita: 1. Germany: 123.2/1,000 2. Sweden: 111.2/1,000 3. Israel: 96.8/1,000 4. Austria: 95.9/1,000 5. U.S.: 74.5/1,000. The Top 10 also includes the UK (64.4); Denmark (62.5); Hungary (52.4); Portugal (40.7); and France (40.3).
As you can see, the risk of lawsuits in the U.S. is less than in Germany, Sweden, Israel, and Austria, and not much greater than the other countries listed in the top 10. Simply stated, Americans are not as litigious as many believe. While the large verdict against McDonalds for serving hot coffee received enormous publicity, that judgment was significantly reduced on appeal and the plaintiff spent the left of her life being ridiculed.
lawsuit that claims the company has a misleading menu that promises privacy but fails to provide it.
Really? What a shocker…
Google gave users a placebo button that doesn’t work to make them feel in control. But rest assured Google has no intention of giving anybody control of their privacy if they’re not legally obliged to do so - or if they can get the law rewritten to their advantage.
Fake buttons are a very common psychological trick. You can read more about it here.
I wouldn’t say he develops fennec, he contributes to fennec. relan develops fennec. Mull depends on fennec to remove proprietary blobs and builds it along with user.js from arkenfox.
privacyguides
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.