• 2 Posts
  • 88 Comments
Joined 11 months ago
cake
Cake day: July 31st, 2023

help-circle




  • I already commented this on another post about chat control but I still stand by what I said before so imma be a dick and put the original comment here as well:

    Imagine there’s one phone type with one security level. And now they introduce a second phone. It has less security. Now everyone has to switch to the weaker phone.

    Soooo, now who gets the stronger phones? Government employees? The military? Politicians? Agencies?

    The less the strong phones you give out, the more authoritarian the measure. But the more the strong phones you give out, the higher the chance of misuse or mishandling. You will now have a black market for secure phones, giving them out to criminals. You will now have people with strong phones having a higher right of privacy, giving them more protection against the state itself.

    Now let’s add more factors. Someone loses their stronger phone. We now have a potentially untraceable strong phone. The government is losing control over those. Now you have 5 different tiers of secure phones. But people are people and the more complicated, the more things can go wrong. Now let’s add in slightly more authoritarian states like Hungary. There’s a good chance they will instantly start spying on journalists. Or give opposition parties the weaker phones by accident.

    Now add in foreign agencies. China’s digital government agencies are very efficient. Imagine they get the keys to the weaker phones. Great, now China can effectively monitor 99% of the EU. And now even if an EU member has a strong phone, they just listen in his wife’s phone, and they get the information anyway. Now what about if a spy from North Korea gets the keys and starts finding bank information on the stronger phones? They now have new super annoying ways of stealing billions of dollars from the EU and covertly as well if they do it right.

    As you can see, making some people’s security weaker on purpose is a lose lose game. It never works. There’s way too many cooks in the kitchen in the EU for this kind of stuff to stay in line, and there WILL be misuse, one way or the other.




  • Imagine there’s one phone type with one security level. And now they introduce a second phone. It has less security. Now everyone has to switch to the weaker phone.

    Soooo, now who gets the stronger phones? Government employees? The military? Politicians? Agencies?

    The less the strong phones you give out, the more authoritarian the measure. But the more the strong phones you give out, the higher the chance of misuse or mishandling. You will now have a black market for secure phones, giving them out to criminals. You will now have people with strong phones having a higher right of privacy, giving them more protection against the state itself.

    Now let’s add more factors. Someone loses their stronger phone. We now have a potentially untraceable strong phone. The government is losing control over those. Now you have 5 different tiers of secure phones. But people are people and the more complicated, the more things can go wrong. Now let’s add in slightly more authoritarian states like Hungary. There’s a good chance they will instantly start spying on journalists. Or give opposition parties the weaker phones by accident.

    Now add in foreign agencies. China’s digital government agencies are very efficient. Imagine they get the keys to the weaker phones. Great, now China can effectively monitor 99% of the EU. And now even if an EU member has a strong phone, they just listen in his wife’s phone, and they get the information anyway. Now what about if a spy from North Korea gets the keys and starts finding bank information on the stronger phones? They now have new super annoying ways of stealing billions of dollars from the EU and covertly as well if they do it right.

    As you can see, making some people’s security weaker on purpose is a lose lose game. It never works. There’s way too many cooks in the kitchen in the EU for this kind of stuff to stay in line, and there WILL be misuse, one way or the other.








  • Famous enough that there’s a steady fan base listening to my music (a thousand people internationally sounds great to me) but nothing more than that. I want that genuine fandom, where people actually enjoy being in a niche and no one stalks you and generally people don’t know you wherever you go.

    Not even for the money, but just to feel appreciated and to know I have a positive impact on people, that’s all I want.

    If it’s only the two extremes? Yeah I’m totally cool with a quiet life.


  • It’s like a defense mechanism for me. Imagine you are always an outsider and you see that people who are insiders get treated super badly at some point just for not looking “perfect”. You start to be cautious about what you wear and how you look, because you need all the tricks you can get to finally fit in. You want friends to, maybe even find love. Everything social in your life might depend on it and who are you to doom yourself. What, you still haven’t done it? Look how easy all of them do it, but you are still just trying? Well it can’t be everyone else can it? There must be something more, maybe you’re not trying hard enough. Maybe you are just too dumb to really try, maybe your stupid body is just too misshapen to get comfortable. Maybe it’s you. You are the problem.

    Anyway, there’s some context. Oh and also if you throw body dysmorphia in the mix the thoughts sound even more crazy.

    Oh also for anyone wondering, I don’t have it as much so don’t worry about me, but I have this just a little bit so I can at least feel how other people hone in on this stuff.





  • Lol

    There’s plenty of people who want that sort of discussion on Lemmy.

    Btw there’s legit uses for the “dark web”. Getting crucial drugs that are illegal (e.g. opioids against PTSD, maybe even abortion drugs soon), communication channels for politically targeted people and more.

    And obviously especially when it is so co controversial, that is even more of a reason for a public discussion forum about it. Lemmy is all about different perspectives, so that fits perfectly.