Comment by palmotea
2 days ago
> Our government is almost schizophrenic in its attitude to encryption.
Of course: it's not a monolithic entity. It's a composite of different parts that have different goals an interests.
2 days ago
> Our government is almost schizophrenic in its attitude to encryption.
Of course: it's not a monolithic entity. It's a composite of different parts that have different goals an interests.
And yet if I steal your money and refuse to give it back, or let you steal it back, you'll call that hypocritical. What does the size of an entity have to do with whether this is idiotic or not?
You're not an entity, you're a person. Scale really does make a difference.
You're making the argument that the UK government will stop using encryption itself once the information about this becoming illegal makes it through the government.
It won't. The courts will refuse to force them to stop, and even if the courts attempt to force it, some government departments just won't listen, and be protected from the consequences.
This is another case of "the law applies to you, but not to me".
2 replies →
>> Of course: it's not a monolithic entity. It's a composite of different parts that have different goals an interests.
> And yet if I steal your money and refuse to give it back, or let you steal it back, you'll call that hypocritical.
That's a bad analogy.
> What does the size of an entity have to do with whether this is idiotic or not?
Because it's not about the size, and I said nothing about the size. It's about it being composed of different minds, organized into different organizations, focused on different goals.
It's just not going to behave like one mind (without a lot of inefficiency, because you'd need literal central planning), because that's not the kind of thing that it is.