This is what I fear the most. It is gas lighting and just manipulation. The idea of privacy will become associated with crime.

Further down the line technical solutions that are private will become illegal and in general not being pro survailance will get you in trouble

▲

teiferer 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> The idea of privacy will become associated with crime.

The risk is there but it is not a given. The debate is not new, it's been going on for decades. It's a permanent struggle.

▲

ShinyLeftPad 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Do you acknowledge that for many people and practically e2ee and crime are connected? e2ee is a very useful tool for crime and combined with crypto useful tool for monetizing crime. Criminals used to speak in code, meet clandestine, use burner phones and websites were easy to shut down. Now they don't need to.

The solution to privacy problem is not to shout while closing your ears but to make it clear that you see their side, how new tech create new problems, and help solve it in least privacy invasive ways.

Otherwise you will always be seen as somebody who has shady agenda. It's just reality. Ordinary people do not care about e2ee. Gotta read the room.

But chat control and age verification are different things.

▲

drtgh 31 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

> But chat control and age verification are different things.

Although they appear to be different different things at first sight, they share the same agenda and objective, mass surveillance and identification of the citizens. Once the door is opened, it can be expected that things will not end there; Politicians and their patrons will exploit this data under "committees" (and of course be excluded from such surveillance as an aggravating factor).

Nowadays it's needed a court order to access legally to the privacy of citizens, and this must be done by the Police or the Interpol, nevertheless someones want to break this.

If they were really worried by the citizens security, they would increase the number of police and judges working in this digital divisions, among other things related to this.

▲

teiferer 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> Ordinary people do not care about e2ee. Gotta read the room.

It's a matter of phrasing things. Moxie had this illustrative take: If your chat is not e2ee, it'a a group chat. It's you, your mom, every secret service in the world and some ISP employees as well. If we could clarify to our social circles and broader society that every non-e2ee chat can be browsed by some overpaid freckled 20-something borded out of his mind at a FAANG or an ISP then the viewpoint could change.

	▲	ShinyLeftPad an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Tons of people use IG and I think they pretty much know that it's them, the other guy and whatever number of contractors monitoring chats. They just don't care. Maybe one of the most helpful parallels is with mail. I think US and other countries have strict laws about mail communication privacy. Someone can in theory open your mail but it's strictly regulated and not done in a total way. Also I do think talking about future malicious government prosecuting people based on what was collected previously is actually a good one. But just talking about privacy may be a little too vague.