Why You Should Hate the Proposed UN Cybercrime Treaty.
Why You Should Hate the Proposed UN Cybercrime Treaty.
International UN treaties aren’t usually on users’ radar. They are debated, often over the course of many years, by diplomats and government functionaries in Vienna or New York, and their significance is often overlooked or lost in the flood of information and news we process every day, even when...
I haven't even read the article, and I already hate it just by the title. I shall now go and read the article itself. The primary reason I hate it already is because anything with crime is generally used to take away people's liberty.
31Thanks, I hate it. So, mission accomplished.
25Just by looking at it I know for them cybercrime is ad-blocking and piracy. Meanwhile phone scams are the most common form of """cyber""" crime and no one bats an eye on them.
10The fact that the phone system hasn't been overhauled to prevent spoofing is a sign of how little anyone actually gives a shit about helping people.
9IANAL: It sounds like the EFF recommendation probably wouldn't help prevent it from being used to investigate ad blocking and piracy:
Recommendation: Restrict the definition to "core cybercrimes" like technical attacks on computers, devices, data, and communications systems. Exclude human rights-protected activities from the scope of the treaty to prevent misuse and ensure these rights are not unjustly targeted due to equating cybercrime with any crime using ICT.
Since blocking ads and piracy aren't likely to be directly related to human rights protected activities, and they'll probably stretch the definition of "core cybercrimes" to include those...
4Not only that they'll probably start using all sorts of surveillance data that Google and Facebook etc. have for all sort of things that people don't expect e.g. Maybe use GPS data to issue speeding tickets...
1
Slowly across the globe we move towards surveillance states, one country is further down the path than the other, but we all makes steps in the same directions. If public awareness won't rise I don't see us escaping this dystopian future. Still today many people argue 'I have nothing to hide' and don't have any critical thought beyond this point. Are we doomed or am I being to negative?
8People are sheep. Yes we are doomed, but most are too blind to see it.
2We are fine. The next generations are doomed with the tech we created.
-2
Counter-proposal: no.
6So various cockroaches have realized that the concept of WWW threatens their monopoly on information allowing them to commit crimes, but, when neutered, makes them tenfold more powerful.
See, in the 90s all the court decisions, cultural and political moves and other stuff in favor of freedom of speech and such in the Web and in the Internet were based on old world principles applied to a new technology. With such a combination these would ruin parts of that old world, but it was the only realistic way.
In the 00s that part has realized that it's going to the junkyard of history and decided to break the parts of old world which produced those principles, and make new ones for the Web and for itself.
That's what all these big states and corps are doing right now. I mean, I'm serious, some things can be either a war or a massacre. The latter if you ignore them. The humanity as a whole is trying to start moving back into barbarism.
5This is one of the worst CTA I had raed recently.
3The link to their key concerns seems to be broken
2That feature was hard to find though, had to search
cache:https://www.eff.org/files/2024/07/29/eff-treaty-un-pagers.pdfand apparently access to google cache is going away entirely soon, so I saved the google cache to the way back machine too2Thank you, appreciate it!
2