Quoting a dead sibling comment from a brand new user (I don't know for sure, but I'm guessing the fresh account, or maybe Tor usage(?) caused the comment to be killed):
Seshat 1 hour ago | link | parent | flag [dead]
It is indeed terrifying....and the worst part is they are being sincere.
Anonymity is a right we are going to have to fight for in the coming decades.
These people live in a world where they are the good guys fighting the evil guys. The good guys need to have special powers...but don't worry, they aren't going to abuse them..oh and don't worry about how they defined bad guys either.
"Imagine in the physical world if you were not able to open the trunk of a car if you had a suspicion that there were weapons or drugs inside... we would never accept this."
Policing should be difficult, if policing is not difficult you live in a police state.
"Imagine in the physical world if you were not able to open the locked door of a home if you had a suspicion that there were weapons or drugs inside... we would never accept this."
It's a compelling argument. Imminent danger allows cops to search and seize without a warrant and every cop can find a reason and won't be prosecuted for basically doing his job, right now. That's the status quo but nobody argues privacy in these case. And it would be grotesk, if cops only patrolled the streets while most crime happens insides without voluntary inclusion of law enforcement. Now they could come to your home instead at least to follow protocol and let you witness the search. On the other hand, data is much more like information than property, so it should be protected by the right to remain silent? Edit: And I say should without any moral connotation.
"There is confusion among the good guys on the internet between anonymity and privacy. I don't think they are the same. I think that you have right to privacy but that doesn't mean that you have the right to anonymity," he said.
The increasing trend towards greater encryption of online communications is not acceptable, he said.
Yet another attack on anonymity and just basic security online.
And he, of course, hates to talk about backdoors because that sounds terrible but what he really wants is backdoors.
Law enforcement and spy-agencies (I can't use the term "intelligence agency" with a straight face) are pushing for a less secure Internet.
Infecting computers, breaking (or pushing for less) encryption, compromising routers and servers is contributing to a worse Internet for everyone.
Sure, the police probably has the best intentions. Except that once you break something for a specific purpose, it remains broken. Even if that purpose sounded just at the time.
I think that the Internet today is as result that our lawmakers are either lawyers or professional politicians. We could really use more engineers or scientists in politics...
I think that you have right to privacy but that doesn't mean that you have the right to anonymity
It almost sounds reasonable, like a compromise of sorts. And that is deeply troubling.