Hacker News Reader

Comment by rubyist5eva | Hacker News Reader

I'm just going to say, if you don't think this _isn't_ going to be massively abused - take a look at what the CCP, or any authoritarian regime does really, to silence dissent.

Don't have a good enough social credit because you shared an opinion somebody doesn't like one too many times? Intel and Microsoft will just remotely brick all your devices.

> Is there a privacy-respecting solution that you prefer?

Yeah, it's called being media literate, using my brain and being vigilant. I don't need Pat Gelsinger, Satya Nadella, Sundar Pichai, Shantanu Narayen, Tim Cook, Mark Zuckerberg, Jack Dorsey or any other power hungry jackass telling me what to think.

View on HN

What if a journalist makes a video and wants everyone to know where it came from?

If it's all opt-in (and otherwise anonymous), doesn't that solve the privacy issue?

I'm definitely not advocating for the OP solution, which is why I asked if anyone knew of alternatives.

Wont just post it from an official social media account belonging to that journalist fix this issue ?

It starts off with opt in, then they do an update to now opt out, then then do an update to make it harder to opt-out and next thing we know this is something everyone has to live with.

How do we know evidence is valid in a court case? Chain of custody and documentation. Add to that some commitment scheme and trusted time-stamping and publish in real time and you are most of the way there to extremely veridical publishing.

But the main problem is the people most vulnerable to fake media are already bamboozled by bad Photoshop jobs. I don't see how any signing scheme will help.

The Journalism Industry has solved the "trust" problem decades ago. This isn't the problem the CCPA is trying to solve.

This is a no-win situation, really. All of those arguments can be made about deepfakes too.

So, how do you make uncle Bob media literate?

Schooling, campaigns. A mandatory "driving" license for media consumption.

Ah, so a 50+ years campaign? Yup, that can work if you can have a government with enough attention span.

Edit: don't get me wrong, _not_ doing that for children is evil. But, the results thus far do speak for themselves... And uncle Bob will not take being sent back to middle school all that well.

Not a 50+ years campaign, an infinitely long campaign. You know just like normal schooling is an infinitely long compaign.

Licensing people for reading a newspaper? That is insane.

I would mandate that you would have to take it until you pass (Excluding extreme cases). But of course you cannot ban people from reading something.

Honestly everything you say sounds like abusive insanity and not anywhere I'd want to live. I hope you don't make any decisions for other people in any capacity ever because you lack fundamental respect for other people's choices.

Having to pass a test so you can function in society is not taking away any choices. What choice would it take away?

The choice anyone else makes to change society to be what they want. Or would they have to lie and take your test to make changes? Only go through your change process?

You have this idea that society is a monolith you can keep people in and out of based on the results of an algorthm, and that's only true for the most authoritarian and oppressive regimes.

That's the world you're trying to create. Social Credit scores as maintained by facebook, etc.

It's truly repulsive.

What are you a talking about. A test does not impact the choice anyone has to change society how they want it to be. You are imagining things I have never even hinted at.

Almost everyone get's swimming lessons and tests. And yet, and this might really blow your mind, you can still actually go swimming without actually having had passed the test. No SWAT team will barge down your door and take you away if you go swimming.

>A test does not impact the choice

Then whats the purpose of the test? Tests are scores used to determine something. You're talking about forcing people to take a test to do what, exactly? Or is it just to indoctrinate them with whatever the test-maker (because it will change every election) comes up with? A thing you must study for but with no reprecussions? Ya right.

Once you create a certification for it, it will become a private passport for access to goods or services, or it will be meaningless. In both cases its either a waste or evil.

With a mandatory test also come mandatory lessons. If you don't pass you have to keep taking the lessons. The lessons will lead to the population having better skills. Seriously I had hoped swimming lessons analogy would make you understand. What is the purpose of swimming lessons and test? Is that done to indoctrinate people that they should not drown? Is having passed a swimming test a private passport for access to goods and services? Get real...

I'm not sure why you keep going down this dark path which I didn't even touch on remotely. You just completely imagine it.

"Think of the elderly" appears to be the new "think of the children" when it comes to erasing privacy (and other freedoms) in the name of "security".

I have definitely fallen victim to that one myself, and have pushed that argument when considering Apple's walled garden in iOS, and how much that has assisted me personally in not having to provide tech support for members of my family.

Unfortunately, between these arguments, and the continued push of individual/consumer responsibility and "vote with your wallet", the vast majority of people do not focus their attention on how technology platforms work, instead focusing their interest and energy in other areas, and will "vote with their wallet" for whatever is the simplest solution at the time.

First order effects are generally not considered when it's not something you care that much about. Second and third order effects are definitely not in mind.

No one said uncle Bob is old. Maybe uncle Bob is your hip cousin who still has no idea how these things work and zero interest to learn it. IMO, the biggest failure of tech discussions is to ignore that technology is there to solve a problem people have. It's not an end, it's a means to an end. People want to know that the video they see which says "filmed in xy" was really filmed in xy and not manipulated afterwards. And saying "yeah, you can just do this yourself, all you have to do is use gpg, make your own signature, distribute it, .." completely misses the point.

>People want to know that the video they see which says "filmed in xy" was really filmed in xy and not manipulated afterwards.

The only people who care enough to give up all privacy on the internet in exchange are deeply misunderstanding what normal people care about. Uncle bob would much rather the meme he made about weed not trace back to him or get to his employer with his fingerprint.

whether some video was filmed in xy doesn't matter unless you're in some sort of political crisis. Bob isn't. You're using a fictional bob to represent your own desires and present them as 'everyman issues'.

Bob doesn't care, and if he did he'd already use authentication. This is your problem, not bob's, but you're using a fake bob as some kind of 'personal shield' for an opinion leaning towards sacrificing freedom and privacy for very little in return.

What real bob wants most is probably less of you interfering in what he can see and read. He's not your kid and your intrusion on his freedom to read and speak are aggression against him.

You can't make uncle Bob any more media literate than he wants to become. So perhaps your energy might be better focused on being a good resource for helping his daughter/your niece become media literate. And then perhaps that may rub off on him via osmosis.

If he doesn't want to be. I don't bother. I also stop taking his incoherent ramblings any more seriously than the limited amount I already did. You can't reason people out of a position they didn't reason themselves into in the first place.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com