Quotes

“Without privacy, a society cannot advance”

A society without rulebreakers doesn’t challenge the rules, the status quo, the established consensus. Yet again, as our society pretends to celebrate its entrepreneurs, its freethinkers, and its trailblazers. But in action, in decree, and in enforcement, today’s societies passionately hate its square pegs in the round holes, its challengers, and its troublemakers — yes, those very same people as it pretends to cherish. It does everything it can to preserve the beautiful present. The one component required for the troublemakers to break out of their cages is privacy.

Falkvinge: Without privacy, a society cannot advance »

Public sector IT-security

The Swedish leak where classified data and networks were outsourced outside the European Union was not an isolated incident, but a pervasive pattern where things are kept safe mostly by good luck and the occasional person who knows their stuff fixing things properly out of pure subordination.

Falkvinge: This is how absolutely headdeskingly clueless politicians are at anything IT security related «

“Fear is a by-product of luxury”

The recently approved dragnet surveillance powers will only increase the number of false accusations. “Data mining is probably an ineffective method for preventing terror attacks”, wrote the Dutch Scientific Council for Government Policy (WRR) in their 2016 report “Big data in a free and safe society” (“Big data in een vrije en veilige samenleving”). “Because each terror attack is unique, it is nearly impossible to create an accurate profile. Combined with the small number of attacks, this results in an unusably high error rate.”. If you don’t look Middle-Eastern, you might be able to convince yourself that it is better to be safe than sorry. However, a Norwegian philosopher Lars Svendsen demonstrated the short-sightedness of this argument already ten years ago in his book “A Philosophy of Fear”. According to Svendsen, Europe lives in a culture of fear: we believe that we are more and more often exposed to increasing danger, from epidemics to terrorism. In reality we are safer than ever, but precisely for this reason we can afford to be worried about dangers that will probably never materialise. Fear is a by-product of luxury.

EDRi ENDitorial: Draconian anti-terrorism measures instil terror »

No to (some) secret EU court proceedings

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) in Luxembourg today ruled in favour
of the German civil liberties activist and pirate party member Patrick
Breyer (Commission vs. Breyer, C-213/15 P): It ordered the Commission
to give the press and the public access to the pleadings exchanged in
completed court proceedings. In the present case Breyer successfully
demanded the Commission disclose Austrian pleadings concerning the
non-transposition of the controversial EU Data Retention Directive.
However the Court fined Breyer for publishing the written submissions in
his own case on his homepage.

Pirate Times: EU Court rules on transparency of EU justice »

Meanwhile, in Australia…

“The laws of mathematics are very commendable but the only law that applies in Australia is the law of Australia”, said Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull today. He has been rightly mocked for this nonsense claim, that foreshadows moves to require online messaging providers to provide law enforcement with back door access to encrypted messages.

EFF: Australian PM Calls for End-to-End Encryption Ban, Says the Laws of Mathematics Don’t Apply Down Under »

Suffocating free speech online, country by country

The trend of courts applying country-specific social media laws worldwide could radically change what is allowed to be on the internet, setting a troubling precedent. What happens to the global internet when countries with different cultures have sharply diverging definitions of what is acceptable online speech? What happens when one country’s idea of acceptable speech clashes with another’s idea of hate speech? Experts worry the biggest risk is that the whole internet will be forced to comport with the strictest legal limitations.

Wired: The World may be Headed for a Fragmented ‘Splinternet’ »

Court case to bring light to »Five Eyes« intelligence cooperation?

“We hope to find out the current scope and nature of the Five Eyes intelligence sharing agreement – and how much has changed since the 1955 version,” Privacy International legal officer Scarlet Kim tells WIRED. “We’d also like to know the US rules and regulations governing this exchange of information – what safeguards and oversight, if any, exist with respect to these activities?”

Wired: The US government is being sued for info on the secretive Five Eyes intelligence group »

UK Snoopers Charter to be challenged in court

It’s become clearer than ever in recent months that this law is not fit for purpose. The government doesn’t need to spy on the entire population to fight terrorism. All that does is undermine the very rights, freedoms and democracy terrorists seek to destroy.

The Register: Civil rights warriors get green light to challenge UK mass surveillance »

The Control Society

The control of information is something the elite always does, particularly in a despotic form of government.

Information, knowledge, is power. If you can control information, you can control people.

Tom Clancy

Why you should bother

It bothers me that if an FBI agent reads this and doesn’t like what I’ve written, he or she can do a search for any of my communications the government might have “incidentally” grabbed under Section 702. Literally. Right now. Without a warrant.

Sarah St.Vincent in The Hill: Why US surveillance bothers me — and should bother you »