Think about why do governments want to ban encryption? Because they want to know everything about you all the time. Collecting information on someone such as their location is of the same order.

▲

gpvos 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It may be of the same order, but it is a different thing. No one, not even techies like here on HN, are going to see his actions as valid.

▲

bondarchuk 2 hours ago | parent [-]

He has to use a different method because obviously he does not have a backdoor into the prime minister's phone. The fact that "obviously wrong" invasive methods have to be used (now) to imitate something that the prime minister want to apply to every citizen (except himself and his buddies) in the future can be seen as part of the point.

	▲	gpvos 33 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Yes, but that also means he both goes too far (for people like me who might sympathize with him) and loses the connection with the original issue, creating his own communication problem. Yes, it is good and necessary to show politicians what they are doing to the citizens they are supposed to represent, but that does not justify all means.

▲

dataflow 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> Think about why do governments want to ban encryption? Because they want to know everything about you all the time.

Or, say, because they want a judicial warrant to be sufficient for obtaining someone's information without their consent?

> Collecting information on someone such as their location is of the same order.

Huh? This sounds crazy.

	▲	bondarchuk 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		It's not that complicated. Minister wants to remove citizens privacy. Protester invades privacy of minister in response. On the one hand I agree that gps-tracking is not exactly the same as analyzing people's messages, on the other hand one can often infer whereabouts through messaging services indirectly or even directly such as when people share their gps location with one another (a feature that e.g. whatsapp has). Anyway, apparently this Peter Hummelgaard has said: "I indisputably believe that surveillance creates an increased sense of security ... and given that the prerequisite for freedom is security, yes, I believe that more surveillance equates to more freedom" so I think you will find it easier to understand these kinds of protest actions if you consider them in the context of privacy vs. surveillance more broadly conceived. (source for quote https://mastodon.social/@chatcontrol/115314954743042414 -> https://www.dr.dk/lyd/special-radio/prompt/prompt-2025/egois...)