Comments by "clray123" (@clray123) on "Rob Braxman Tech" channel.

@timogul No, you do not randomly investigate people in a civilized country or record their communications because an algorithm told you so.
3
@timogul Guilty until proved innocent, the long-standing legal principle, huh?
2
The same way we caught criminals for the entire history of humanity without being able to listen in on all their communications.
1
@timogul No, we caught criminals by following evidence leading to their actual crimes, especially consisting of other, non-criminal people witnessing the crimes while they were being committed or explicitly planned. Not by screening overall population for the possibility of crime - this method was only used in totalitarian states of the past (and is used in totalitarian states today, where the monitored "crimes" are defined according to political considerations). It has only become popular in normal countries after 9/11 with Bush's "anti-terror" agenda.
1
You're in control of neither the software nor the hardware, and the future software is most definitely going to require vendor-approved hardware (and vice versa). We're in the end game of you don't own, you only rent, with permission.
1
They sure can be stopped if your hardware refuses to run them because they are not signed by the vendor.
1
If by "we" you define a few people who actually bothered to install PGP, which is pretty much nobody.
1
@sebidotorg The point of the video is that in the last decade app vendors made end-to-end encryption easily accessible to everyone for communications (as browser vendors made it for web surfing before). This is what you are wrongly arguing against by pointing out that the technology existed and was (barely) used before.
1
@sebidotorg That is the only interpretation that makes sense in context of this video. The focus of the video is on new laws having a mass effect on consumers, not about the history of encryption. Therefore, seek the cause of the confusion in your pedantic willful misunderstanding, not in his presentation.
1
@sebidotorg It is ridiculous of you to assume that someone will go re-watching the entire video again just to argue with you, nitpicker.
1
These linux phones etc. will be killed off by "Trusted Computing". Basically, your hardware device required to use a chip to cryptographically prove it's not "rogue" to any other device it communicates with. So it may soon be that you will not be allowed on the network if you try accessing it from a device without such vendor-controlled chip.
1
The funny thing is that you pay for it, and they still own it after the sale. And even funnier is that most buyers happily fall for it and don't mind at all.
1
The basic fight here is to control and sabotage your end devices. Mostly people already willingly submit to it by using their phones.
1
The sad reality is that the majority of the Earth's population doesn't care. And so they will get the world they truly deserve.
1
You don't need "tyrannical". Government is inherently a tyrannical concept - it is based on threat of violence to anyone who does not follow the law, and it is a very select minority who is deciding what is law at any given time (the theory that they represent the majority's vote is very shaky indeed, given the conflicts of interest, the very apparent lack of choice to vote in sane individuals in elections, and the ability of elected officials to remain in power [perhaps swapping in and out with their friends] once the intended domination is attained).
1
@anon_y_mousse Tyranny is always there and results from the imbalance of power. The only non-tyrannical state of affairs would be if everyone was able to fend off the bullies for themselves, but it is illusory and never existed. So what we have instead is tyranny in various shades of grey, sometimes more hidden from view and sometimes fully apparent.
1
Australia/NZ have already demonstrated that they are really just penal colonies during the pandemic. But the captive population support that kind of shit, they basically happy to run their own prison.
1
In the end it comes down to who controls your bank account and who can turn off your electricity. You can resist all you want.
1
@jaakkopontinen By your definitions the inhabitants of North Korea have perfect privacy. They can talk to each other all the time. In the forest. If they are admitted to leave their apartment and enter the forest, that is.
1
@jaakkopontinen Your argument is what's called pulling at straws. It may be technically true that you can still privately communicate with people face-to-face, but when most of the modern communication occurs through electronics, it comes as little consolation that you can still do it the caveman way. And it is also easy to restrict people movements and ability to meet (as we have clearly seen during pandemic), so even that weak argument of yours is bad.
1
@jaakkopontinen Most of the people in all the countries glued to their smartphone screens for both professional and private communications. I think you are vastly overestimating the amount of face-to-face communications happening, as of 2023.
1
@Axrover With microshaft's Trusted Computing Module you may soon find that your open source OS does not boot because it is not deemed "trustworthy" enough by the PC...
1
Not if you are not using their platform/end device. But that gap is also closing rapidly.
1
Let's turn the entire world into one big China seems to be the master plan.
1
@timogul As long as the police officer is in the public he can drive around all he wants. He should not be driving around across my property or my bedroom, though.
1
@timogul We are talking about everything going in your private conversations, using your private device. Did you even watch the damn video? And yes, they can get a warrant for your property, and this requires due process of law and a court order, not a policeman happy to snoop around your house. Are you crazy?
1
@DietmarEugen This is exactly what is intended and why - see pandemic policies.
1
Big efforts underway to eliminate cash. The ability to watch and prevent transactions (all and any of them) is indeed the crown jewel of total surveillance.
1