this post was submitted on 10 Apr 2024
372 points (98.7% liked)

Technology

59569 readers
4136 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 9 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (29 children)

I'm not sure how that's relevant. People should be free to use whatever they want. I'm not interested in Russian software, but that doesn't mean banning it is okay. The same goes for Chinese software like TikTok (not touching that), Iranian software, or North Korean software, if that's even a thing. I don't care if literal Nazis made the software, people should be free to use what they want.

The only areas the government should get involved are:

  • government owned devices
  • public advisories
  • prosecution of crimes where the software is involved

The software I choose to use is not the government's business. If I violate a law, charge me with a crime, but don't preemptively ban stuff.

[–] Plastic_Ramses@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago (28 children)

What if said software is being used to manipulate national interests from a civilian level and its owned by an adverserial nation?

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 0 points 7 months ago (22 children)

That's one of the costs of liberty. The government will need to find another way.

The barrier to banning something in the interests of national security must be much higher than "this could be used by our enemies." That's the entire basis for the War on a Terror, the Patriot Act, and the NSA spying on Americans, and I won't stand for it. It's also the same idea as banning books, that's just not how a free society works.

You combat misinformation through integrity and transparency, not bans.

[–] 0xD@infosec.pub 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Banning software is not the same as banning books, lol. Books are passive ideas, software is active and can be used for espionage. You're creating a false equivalence here.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

They're absolutely in the same category.

If the government can ban things in the name of "national security" based on little more than "it's potentially dangerous," what's stopping them from labeling any platform that doesn't censor information the way they want as "dangerous" and subject to bans?

The government doesn't get to choose what I run on my computers, nor do they get to choose what books I read, what movies I watch, etc.

[–] 0xD@infosec.pub 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Oh yeah, the fallacious slippery slope again. How creative and intellectual!

If there's anything it applies to, it's government overreach. Look at how the TSA expanded its violation of personal privacy in the name of "security," or how the NSA and FBI have expanded surveillance of individuals. Look at the militarization of police.

Once you let the government ban a handful of apps, it's going to use that new power more frequently. That's what bureaucrats do, when you give them a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

There are so many examples of government getting its foot in the door and steadily expanding its control. That's what it does.

load more comments (20 replies)
load more comments (25 replies)
load more comments (25 replies)