Inserting their name once into the article doesn't make the article about them. Nor does it change anything I've said, or make your comments any more correct. This is a law that would apply to EVERY company, and not every company is already in the business of freely serving up your data, least of all in the ways proposed by the actual topic of this article.
Signal, DuckDuckGo, and NordVPN threaten to exit Canada if metadata surveillance law passes
- Thread starter Daniel Sims
- Start date
LordVile95
Posts: 504 +300
It literally states that they’ve joined in.
Every company that collects meta data, if they don’t collect it then there’s no issue is there? And they don’t have to break encryptions
That's not how it works. If the law comes in, it would require companies to collect, and then retain, and then be able to share, metadata, regardless of whether they currently do any of these things or not. So it DOES (if it happens) affect them, and then everyone who's data would be made available.
Vanderlinde
Posts: 810 +533
No digital communication, as we know it, is ever safe. Like, always expect that a third party might be reading, listening with you. If it's not today the stored info likely will be after a while. It was a lesson I learned myself some time ago.
All that encrypted stuff nonsense Meta is craming out; it's nonsense. All those big brands, apple, meta, google etc etc etc have obvious law enforcement backdoors in the event of whatever and can grant access to all that there is.
Even the dutch police has a disclaimer that in the event of tapping an individual or group,
They can just read any conversation pretty much, watch you doing video calls and what more. None of those companies ever risking their whole existance for a few hundreds of users in regards of privacy.
There's no privacy.
All that encrypted stuff nonsense Meta is craming out; it's nonsense. All those big brands, apple, meta, google etc etc etc have obvious law enforcement backdoors in the event of whatever and can grant access to all that there is.
Even the dutch police has a disclaimer that in the event of tapping an individual or group,
They can just read any conversation pretty much, watch you doing video calls and what more. None of those companies ever risking their whole existance for a few hundreds of users in regards of privacy.
There's no privacy.
In dictatorships, these regulations and bans exist for the rulers to control the people and rule till they die.
In Western world, however, these laws are enacted to be able to know who sad what and when. Our own world is changing, and growing issues require to either admit very major mistakes our politicians keep making, or to silent them. Because it is not enough that an idea or an opinion is banned, they want to see everyone who refuses to let it go.
The "I can see what you say every minute" is enough to deter many from expressing ideas or thoughts that are appointed to be forbidden. But since these very ideas are a result of societal issues, they cannot just die. As some problems keep growing, these ideas find more and more followers. By trying to deanonymize people who promote and spread these ideas, the Western governments hope to at least limit "the damage." If I know who said it, I can try to punish you when the time is right, or when the society is conditioned to accept that these things should not be legal.
At the end of the day, not dealing with problems (even those that are declared nonexistent or holy) only increases the desire to speak and look for solutions.
The scariest thing to me is that we already have many officeholders that do not hesitate to call white black or the other way around and accuse those who refuse to agree of all the sins except for law breaking (for now). To not have privacy to accuse them of lies or deceit is something they would very much want. Look at the cities or entire countries with very strict or outright bans of weapons, firearms and cold. It does not help. The only thing they can boast of is that the crimes are committed other ways. Yeah, we did it guys, guns no loner kill people. Grenades however... They failed and keep failing because most of restrictions do not fix people. And to these people, the idea that we have to do something with the PEOPLE is terrifying. It points exactly at the problem and at the people who 1. failed to acknowledge it, and 2. fix it.
In brief, nothing good comes from these restrictions, especially since they are not designed to fix something. They are purely designed to give the political establishment more control, control over speech, and the ability to track and punish those who express forbidden ideas. I did not say "unlawful" because we are still where these opinions and ideas are called wrong, evil, racist but still not unlawful.
PXAbstraction
Posts: 135 +459
Yeah, this is BS misinformation.
I don't support C-22 at all and have expressed that to my Member of Parliant and the PMO, but talking about us speedrunning to a dystopia compared to what's happening in the US right now is hilarious.
Gravitytr1
Posts: 230 +138
You can go to jail in Canada, or worse, have ur kids legally kidnapped, if you teach them the "wrong" things, like conventional and natural gender roles.
Heck, the law specifically allows you to be arrested if you try save your kids by leaving the country to avoid your kids becoming trans, either before you ride the plane or after you return.
If that's specifically what legislation is pursuing, then mass surveillance is is nothing in comparison.
Canada and the UK make the US seem free.
Heck, the law specifically allows you to be arrested if you try save your kids by leaving the country to avoid your kids becoming trans, either before you ride the plane or after you return.
If that's specifically what legislation is pursuing, then mass surveillance is is nothing in comparison.
Canada and the UK make the US seem free.
I think that the use of 'citizen' & 'China' in the same sentence is an oxymoron. They ought to be called subjects or perhaps serfs.
Similar threads
