Still remember how one German Islamist terror group just used their web-email provider's draft feature. They never 'sent' anything. There are often quite simple ways to circumvent this kind of thing.
Good, but your e-mail provider can still see it. And be forced to eavesdropping.
Back in '90s I used a nym e-mail to receive e-mails anonymously and with no traces.
In a few words - e-mails are encrypted with your PGP key and posted to Usenet groups, where you scan all messages and extract only those signed&encrypted with your key.
Yep, there are 1000 and 1 method of communicating securely. Governments are just using this as an excuse to wiretap popular messaging services for general surveillance.
Unless they'll get away with making everyone dumber, they shall fail.
My Twitter account has been suspended for suspicious activity. Someone with whom I disagreed probably tried logging into my account a few times that triggered it, and now I cannot regain access to my account unless I provide my phone number. When you sign up, phone number is optional, but when someone fucks around with you, it becomes mandatory. The fact that the system is designed this way is absurd. This is not limited to Twitter, by the way.
Yeah only a stupid person can think that backdooring whatsapp will actually prevent the next 9/11. And that's in my opinion the core issue with most politicians, stupidity/tech illiteracy.
I'd love to hear about either a possible alternative government structure in which there are no politicians or a way to attract the smartest people in governments.
When you consider the societal fallout and everything that has transpired since, the most insane part to me is that by its very occurrence, 9/11 itself already prevented the next 9/11. The "next 9/11" was to crash the fourth hijacked plane into a high value traget; the plane on which the passengers fought back which was crashed in Pennsylvania WAS the next 9/11. This was a tactic that was apprehended and adapted to before the day was out. It worked three times on one day, once. An update to the mental calculus of common folks was all it really took. If we had successfully prevented it re-shaping our society, it would have never, ever, ever worked again. This newfound understanding of the rules coupled with a straight-forward countermeasure like reinforced cockpit doors would have closed off that vector of attack entirely.
19 malevolent people acting in 2001 have colored nearly two decades of policy for America. I remember two particular circulating ideas from the time: "they're attacking our way of life" and "they hate us because we are free." The latter was much more divisive and so people spent much more time arguing with each other about it. Meanwhile, whether intentionally on the part of the attackers or not, the first was very effectively accomplished.
Maybe if there had been no 9/11, the agencies charged with protecting Americans would have still been seduced by the ease with which modern technology enables broad surveillance. Maybe hoovering up all the data is too good an opportunity to pass up. Regardless, I yearn for, and still miss the end of history. Our hubris has been rewarded with interesting times.
On the politicians side I agree, tech illiteracy seems to be largely correct. As far as the intelligence agencies are concerned, well I think they know exactly what they are doing. So they know that a WhatsApp backdoor doesn't help against the next 911, it still allows a lot of general surveillance so. And that is what the agencies are after. Terrorists are just an excuse IMHO.
Politicians are not at all stupid in general. The problem we have is in their selective listening after we elect them.
If a legislator is not technically up to speed, considerable tax payer money goes towards hiring people in government to do the research and the explaining. Some high level advisers may come from organizations with a private agenda and after a few years of working within the goverment these experts pop right back to their industry jobs and we don't hear of them anymore.
Ultimately its the same need in whatever form of government we want – we need people we can trust.
This is why people have advocated for bottom up governance, where local groups make decisions and select rotating representatives to take those decisions as made by the group to larger regional councils, etc. In this way no individual has any real power. This is called democratic confederalism and is in progress in Rojava now but could be done in the US.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LcndZ0nZ0mo
Along with the vote in process there should be a vote out process. The public should be able to force a vote of their representative at any time during their term and equally vote in their replacement.
The intention being that politicians are aware that they must be consistent with their words and actions throughout their term otherwise they will lose their seat.
Some months before the last big bail out legislations, in my state we had a US Senate candidate who was new in our political scene, appeared as a local man with a law degree from our state university, and he spoke about how the working people struggled with unemployment, delinquencies etc, as he knew middle class issues and can change the ways of Washington. PBS featured him and I still remember the interview they aired from his kitchen in a middle class home. I am among the people who voted him in.
A few years after this election I checked his voting records by chance and I realized that he had voted almost always in favor of the bailout system. I wouldn’t have known this by just reading the news or watching cable. In the next election cycle he won handily, this time supported by organizations with cash to blanket our news with favorable lines for him. That’s how life works I guess.
Everyone bitched at me for not voting the last election. To every person who asked me, I asked who they voted for our states railroad commissioner. They all said “oh I don’t know I just voted all blue”. I asked them if they knew what our railroad commissioner did, they did not know. So I proceeded to enlighten them on how the RR commissioner controls everything around our state’s oil fund and that they all just voted for the equivalent of donald trump to manage our oil rich state.
Of course he did not win because the other candidate was much better qualified and rural voters knew him en masse (he’s the one that signs checks for all the citizen stewards of oil fields), but I found it hilarious that people would flame me for not voting for a figurehead (president) but be a-ok to vote in some no name hack to manage our schools because of big money advertising in elections
> I'd love to hear about either a possible alternative government structure in which there are no politicians or a way to attract the smartest people in governments.
In all seriousness this is the aim of all historical anarchist movements. Despite the propagandization of the term "anarchism", that philosophy has a long history of attempts and writers and thinkers, and it has more often than not "failed" when a powerful state entity violently disbanded the efforts or killed prominent leaders. In other cases anarchism has not failed at all but has existed in tribal communities in different ways long before european thinkers wrote on the subject.
It's the same tactic that former CIA Director David Petraeus used to send messages to his mistress. It's been around for a while, so investigators look for it.
Or the paris attacks that were orchestrated on the playstation network and via unencrypted sms.. by ppl that were on a watch list already.. The problem is not encryption here
The idea that using a webmail provider's draft feature provides security might have been true a long time ago--I don't know--but it's really stupid to think it does so nowadays.
Back in '90s I used a nym e-mail to receive e-mails anonymously and with no traces.
In a few words - e-mails are encrypted with your PGP key and posted to Usenet groups, where you scan all messages and extract only those signed&encrypted with your key.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudonymous_remailer
Yep, there are 1000 and 1 method of communicating securely. Governments are just using this as an excuse to wiretap popular messaging services for general surveillance.
Unless they'll get away with making everyone dumber, they shall fail.