>Sir do you know why you were brought here?
>Alright look Mr. Bigshot Hacker, we've been trying to avoid spelling this out, but just for you, we're gonna make it as clear as possible.
>Your supposed 'right to privacy' DOES NOT EXIST. Federal law only protects citizens against *unreasonable* search and seizure and there's a very good reason for that.
>Look you're a citizen here, right? You enjoy the benefits of a country where laws and law enforcement protect the peace. That means it's YOUR responsibility, JUST AS MUCH as any other citizen's, to help ensure that protection, and that requires TRANSPARENCY from all involved parties.
>So let's just get to the point: you're hereby under executive order to DECRYPT YOUR FUCKING THINKPAD AND SIGN IN TO THE GOOGLE BOTNET. You've been asked multiple times, it IS constitutional at this point for us to take drastic measures, and unless you comply, you DO face confiscation and prison time.
>We KNOW you're doing something illegal on that thing, it's your CIVIL RESPONSIBILITY to cooperate with our efforts to find out WHAT, and if you don't, you're showing EXTREME disrespect to your country and everyone who shares it with you -- even more extreme, by a significant margin, than the disrespect you've already shown by committing your heretofore unknown cyber-crimes in the first place.
Sir do you know why you were brought here?
>I forgot my password, sorry. You can talk to my lawyer though
Based.
>We've already been through the court procedure and reviewed the verdict multiple times, even if you somehow didn't remember this you should be aware of it from the fact that things even got to this point. Do you understand what an executive order is? The president doesn't have to talk to your lawyer, he's the fucking president. Open em up and if you've """forgotten your password""" too bad for you
YOU JUST MESSED WITH THE WRONG H4X0R, PAL
*initiates advanced LOIC attack*
imagine actually spending the time to type out your freetard rape fantasy and post it on a scandinavian collapsable furniture bbs
Cringe
>alright this was his last chance take im in
It's the other way around actually, granted the google botnet part was pretty tongue in cheek but ultimately this is supposed to be an unironic argument against freetardation. My argument, spelled out more plainly, is as follows: You can fantasize about hiding your information from the federal government all you want, but in the end, the federal government A) is rightfully entitled to your private information as long as you want to live in a country where your life is safe, and B) is not your enemy, but a servant of the peace you enjoy. So if you're doing anything you genuinely have reason to hide from the federal government, that same reason is surely something that makes you an enemy of your own country. If there's something you think you should be allowed to do, that your country disagrees with, it's your responsibility to take it up with the judicial and legislative branches, not go behind the executive branch's back.
Would you like some salt with that boot?
>he doesn't have an actual counterargument
The interesting thing about CIA niggers is they glow in the dark, so you can see them at night while you're driving and just run them over
>idolizing an unironic schizo
Go suck a dick fed, the state is "entitled" to absolutely fucking nothing and they can lock me up for as long as they wish while they use fancy side-channel attacks and backdoors to break my encryption, I'm not giving them shit, it's all going to fall apart soon anyway
A. I'm entitled to consult a lawyer and have that lawyer present in an investigation
B. if you have a reason to suspect me, what is it?
>the federal government is rightfully entitled to your private information as long as you want to live in a country where your life is safe
C. no, it isn't, all I owe the government is to obey the law and not an inch more, it's entirely reasonable for me to not want the government sticking it's nose where it's not legally permitted to.
and D. there absolutely IS a right to privacy, that right can be revoked under circumstances codified in federal law, and from the sound of it, you don't have it.
>the state is "entitled" to absolutely fucking nothing
Sure, not from you anyway, IF -- IF!!! -- you don't want to be a citizen of your country.
>they can lock me up for as long as they wish
If you refuse to cooperate with the law, that's not even the worst they can do. If you don't accept the terms of the law, you don't get to enjoy the benefits of the law. Including the benefit of not being shot dead. Granted, no modern country would do this, since foreign policy and human rights are a thing now, but they could if they wanted to, there's not really anything stopping them. Governance is an agreement between a government and its citizens, the citizens forfeit some natural rights and the government protects and respects their other ones. You might think you have a natural right to survive, but if you're not willing to forfeit unto your government the natural rights they ask you to forfeit, then the government is not obligated in turn to protect or respect any of your other natural rights, including your right to survive. If you encroach upon a wild bear's territory, and you don't take the necessary measures pacify and befriend it, it will eat you. This is no fault of the bear.
>A. I'm entitled to consult a lawyer and have that lawyer present in an investigation
If it's gotten to the point that they have to issue an executive order demanding information from you, you can assume an investigation has already been conducted, turned up results, and you have already been arrested, tried, and sentenced, and you have been evading your sentence.
Nice paragraphs, still wouldn't give my encryption key though
enjoy you're (you are) execution ;^)
Honestly if the president personally issued an executive order for the sole purpose of getting me to decrypt my laptop, I'd do it.
There's nothing illegal on it anyway, so they went through an awful lot of work for nothing.
At least I'll die with my self-respect intact, enjoy your life of servitude to a false god
>making an agreement with some of your fellow citizens, that you won't do certain things to others and in return others won't do those things to you, is serving a false god
What if what I hide is damaging to the government, and exposes crimes theyve committed and are hiding from the public?
>if they wanted to, the government could throw caution to the wind and just flagrantly violate human rights, ensuring almost instantaneous civil and international war
Yeah, that sounds real probable.
If the government has committed crimes, give up your citizenship, get on a boat, and litigate them through an international court. Or, if you prefer, just incite a revolution bro lol
>ensuring almost instantaneous civil and international war
If you don't respect the law, and the government can make that clear to the rest of the citizen body, then not necessarily
if he did with me I'd promptly tell him to suck my hairy balls, pack my shit and move somewhere where my rights are treated as rights, not as privileges that can be taken away at some jackass' leisure
>sorry, but you yelling at me made me forget my password
>hope you're gonna do the right thing and compensate me for the emotional damage you caused before i lawyer up :^)
I don't recall making any such agreement with anyone
>just trust the courts bro lol
Might as well just give up for all the good that would do
>before i lawyer up
again, if it's gotten to the point they have to deal with you this way in the first place then you can assume it's rather too late for that
>move somewhere where my rights are treated as rights, not as privileges that can be taken away at some jackass' leisure
good luck with that, your rights aren't naturally or inherently protected just because you're a person, either you need to entrust the task of protecting your rights to some other person or entity, who must consent to protect your rights and is allowed to have terms for this consent, or you can go live in international waters and protect your own rights with heavy weaponry
>I don't recall making any such agreement with anyone
every moment you spend being a consent-capable adult and not moving to another country, you are implicitly and continuously reinstating the agreement. if you want to stop agreeing to it, just move. same thing with being in some rando's house, you're agreeing to the house rules just by being there even if you "don't recall" agreeing, if you want to stop agreeing then there's the door show yourself out.
>>just trust the courts bro lol
>Might as well just give up for all the good that would do
if that's how you feel, then like i said, just move or incite a revolution.
or rather, if you really feel that even the international courts can't be trusted, the truly responsible thing to do would be to revolt on an even larger scale and take down the international courts
Dealing with the cops is easy: shut up, lawyer up, and fuck them up. It's unbelievable how few arrests will end in a real conviction.
>or you can go live in international waters
off to building a boat and finding an island that still hasn't been bought, i guess :^)
>just live in international waters, bro
>just incite a revolution, bro
I can't tell if this is trolling or genuine bootlicking of such a high caliber that I, A person who usually rolls their eyes when some Jow Forums faggot calls someone a bootlicker because they're not psuedo-nihilist children, can't help but call you a bootlicker.
if it is a troll 10/10, you got me, I concede defeat.
Are you suggesting I should just be ok with the government committing heinous crime?
you forgot Jow Forums's rule 0: everyone is always trolling
op didn't have me fooled for a second, i only reply bc i enjoy larping as much as him
the fact that little to no unoccupied land is left isn't something the occupants of currently occupied land have to answer for. if you don't want to consent to any kind of governance and can't find anywhere unoccupied to live then unfortunately the only thing left to tell you is that you can fuck off and die. that's no one's fault, it's just how overpopulation and right of conquest work. or you could declare war and conquer something for yourself i guess. but good luck doing that if you have no government, as this also implies you haven't amassed enough manpower for one to form naturally.
yes but again the scenario my OP stipulates would only happen after you've already been arrested and convicted and then evaded sentence for a long time while continuing to commit further crimes
no, i'm suggesting that if your government truly is delinquent then it's your civil responsibility to renegotiate the lockeian contract by whatever means necessary. so, yes, UNIRONICALLY, "just incite a revolution, bro."
>assume
Lol no
Sorry sir but my computer burned down in a house fire. Its my fault for getting an intel processor really but hey, nothing to be done about it now right?
>(1)
>quality image
>uncropped signature
Big brain over here
Couldn't you have made a generic 'I'm too stupid to use linux and here's a wall of text explaining why' thread? Those are much more enjoyable for the participants.
But user, Gentoo is my daily driver.
I made a thread criticizing Linux users from my Linux computer.
What if whats being hidden from the government is the means to prove their injustice and dismantle or damage said government. Would it not be my patriotic duty to protect and spread such information? Also even in your fantasy would I not have the right to ignore my counties laws and regulations so long as I am able to avoid or negate any potential consequences since we are operating under a "Do as thou will" morality?
That's doesn't excuse you, really.
>I challenge you to battle evil wizard!
>I throw my fireball at you
>NUHUH IM FIREPROOF
This thread is fucking terrible.
>What if whats being hidden from the government is the means to prove their injustice and dismantle or damage said government. Would it not be my patriotic duty to protect and spread such information?
Yes, obviously, but at that point your government isn't legitimate so adherence to its laws is no longer a matter of discussion.
From not making a thread about being too stupid to use Linux?
I should think it would.
The real question is. If you have information that fucks the government, and the govenment forces you to decrypt as part of some plan to avoid being fucked, who are you going to turn to? Protip: the government runs the military, law and police. You are fucked.
Anarchy is the only way to go.
Executive order? That sounds like a profitable lawsuit. I bet I could make a book deal out of it. Might even be a regular talking head commentator if I play it right. Why didn't you just get a warrant?
see:
>I should think it would.
The poster above you hit the jackpot. You'd get more replies with the thread I suggested, and that's all you're after anyway.
Why would i need more than 48 replies
>2435397▶
>
>see:
>
>
>
>
If they had any information they would have just got a warrant. They're not that hard to get.
Executive orders against specific people, especially people who do not work for the government, are political poison. It's definitely going to go to court and unless you're aligned to a currently-unpopular political figure, it's probably going to get reversed.
Just stage a coup or hit the big red reset button nerd EZ.
All governments are ethically illegitimate, its literally just a matter of might makes right.
For the coveted (You)s, of course.
>We KNOW you're doing something illegal on that thing...
Innocent until proven guilty is a thing, this is the point at which the whole thing goes out the window.
They can only decrypt it if you're guilty, but the only way to find out if you are is decrypting it.
This whole thread is retarded.
If you're gonna respond to everything with "nuh uh cause the government can do anything" why even pretend you want an argument.
DUE PROCESS YOU FUCKING PIG. WE HAVEN'T EVEN GONE TO COURT YET.
>If they had any information they would have just got a warrant.
The implication is that they already got a warrant, dug up dirt, took you to court, won, and sentenced you, and then you illegally avoided serving the sentence.
>All governments are ethically illegitimate,
That's wrong. If you consent to forfeit the rights asked of you, and the government consents to protect the rights you ask of it, the government is ethically legitimate. If you stop consenting to forfeit the rights asked of you, it's ethically illegitimate for you, and you specifically, to continue accepting the protections the government offers. If the government stops consenting to protect the rights its people ask of it, or if everyone stops consenting to forfeit the rights asked of them, the government itself becomes ethically illegitimate.
That part was tongue in cheek and inconsistent with what I was actually trying to express, I meant to imply that "proven guilty" has already happened
(yes you have)
Why are cops always assholes with a chip on their shoulder? Even when I show kindness, they treat me like shit, as if I don't even deserve to be in their presence.
>why do cops have chips on their shoulder
I think it's because they've been eating chips. You can tell from their pot bellies
>The implication is that they already got a warrant, dug up dirt, took you to court, won, and sentenced you, and then you illegally avoided serving the sentence.
Ok.... why would they need an executive order if I'm a fugitive? Why would he be playing coy about what I've already been convicted of.
Just admit that OP doesn't know anything about how the law works.
>We KNOW you're doing something illegal on that thing, it's your CIVIL RESPONSIBILITY to cooperate with our efforts to find out WHAT
Fifth amendment.
I am OP and I do admit I don't know anything about how "the law" works (in quotation marks because we haven't even actually established what country we're talking about).
Regardless I continue to espouse the philosophy of John Locke. There should be absolute transparency about what the people can do and what the government can do. What rights are forfeited and what rights are protected and respected in return. If it's legal by the government's own laws for them to digitally collect data on their citizens without the citizens' explicit case-by-case consent, then the government shouldn't have to take any measures to hide the fact that they're doing so, and it should be common knowledge among ordinary citizens that their technology is designed to allow such surveillance. If, on the other hand, it's illegal for the government to conduct unsolicited digital surveillance, and they are indeed doing so and trying to hide it, then we, the citizens, should immediately cast off the government and "renegotiate the contract," as peacefully or violently as necessary, and form upon its ruins a new independent nation with a new government. These should be the only two possibilities -- either the government makes its surveillance legal and the people agree to it, or the people overthrow the government. There should be no in-between state like the one we seem to be in now.
>ITT: OP theoretically learns the difference between "security" and "privacy"
IE, next time don't get caught. Silly philosophical construct.
>the federal government A) is rightfully entitled to your private information as long as you want to live in a country where your life is safe,
They ISSUE your private information, dipshit. The problem is non-government entities ever getting more than your name, rank and postal code.
>They ISSUE your private information, dipshit.
Not all of it. Only the identifying bits. The government doesn't, for instance, issue your undisclosed criminal activity.
>The problem is non-government entities ever getting more than your name, rank and postal code.
That's a completely separate problem and beyond the scope of this thread.
>teleports behind him
>nothing personnel kid
*pings his brain 69 times*
>His 20iq cop brain overloads
kek
>If you consent to forfeit the rights asked of you,
I don't. Fuck off.
and the government consents to protect the rights you ask of it,
They don't. Fuck off.
the government is ethically legitimate.
Its not. Fuck off.
You describe a fantasy. Your Government is willing to commit atrocities and will laugh in the face of human rights when its convenient to do so just as mine and all others would do the same. It and it's people will lie, murder, steal, rape, pillage, and pilfer in the name of their ideals.
What is the boot-licking CIA doing on MY Jow Forums?
Smells like a bunch of pig shit in
If you don't consent to forfeit the rights asked of you, and your government doesn't consent to protect the rights you ask of it, then you aren't governed. If a government you aren't governed by makes an attempt to protect its citizens' rights against your actions, that's no longer called arrest, it's called war.
Coups take time and resources brainlet. Nothing is going to happen overnight.
The issue is that nothing is happening at all. Personally I think we should just make unsolicited digital surveillance from the government legal but I'm all for whatever approach gets things moving even if it's not in the direction I support.
Joke's on you. Your law actually requires that I encrypt my drives since I deal with personally identifying health care data.
>I think we should just make unsolicited digital surveillance from the government legal
Why?
safety
>password
Not sure what you're implying sir. I ran
dd if=/dev/null of=/dev/mydrive
Maybe that's how it got like like that. You're welcome to prove the random data actually translates to something encrypted.
>dd if=/dev/null
this wouldn't do anything, there are no bytes to copy
I fundamentally disagree with you. I value liberty above safty.
Also I think your argument is flawed in that your data is far to valuable to trust with keeping even if truly benevolent (its not, but I am not going to argue that any further). Any back doors implemented by your government can be used by an attacker. Any stored information has the potential to be leaked.
BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG
>I fundamentally disagree with you. I value liberty above safty.
Governance is a compromise between liberty and safety. Anyone who's trying to influence the law or make a decision as to where to live has to evaluate liberty against safety on a case-by-case basis; a sweeping decision to favor one over the other is not sufficient. If you ALWAYS "value liberty above safety," you'll be happiest living on a pirate ship.
>Any back doors implemented by your government can be used by an attacker.
if every device has always-active government backdoors then any attacker who uses a government backdoor will be immediately found out by the government
How so? Do I need to set the blocksize flag or something? dd is not usually a command I fuck for obvious reasons.
>Governance is a compromise between liberty and safety....
Don't be so fucking obtuse. You knew I wasn't talking about absolute liberty just as I know you aren't talking about absolute safty.
>if every device has always-active government backdoors then any attacker who uses a government backdoor will be immediately found out by the government
Except when it doesn't. You know very little about security if you believe such a protocol couldn't be spoofed or manipulated.
Maybe you meant /dev/random?
>How so?
If you open /dev/null as input, it just immediately sends an EOF. If you want to corrupt something, you want /dev/random or /dev/urandom; alternatively, /dev/zero may be faster if a uniform result of nothing but zeroes is acceptable. If you just use /dev/null, you won't be able to copy any data from it because the whole point of /dev/null is that it doesn't provide any data. This is different from providing zeroed or uninitialized data; instead of the zero byte or whatever byte happens to be in memory coming out of it, literally no bytes come out at all.
It comes down to the same argument people make about gun control, if the government controls all guns then criminals will still get their hands on guns through "spoofing or manipulating" or just stealing shit, but if the government doesn't control guns then people who might otherwise be peaceful but angry will become criminals.
They're not my hard drives, I have neither ownership nor control of them.
>gun control strawman
Data is information. Weapons are tools. Also you failed to demonstrate any knowledge in how network protocols, back-doors, and encryption actually work. You are a fool, you don't know what you are actually talking about and you just felt like parroting your favorite philosophy of the week.
>So if you're doing anything you genuinely have reason to hide from the federal government, that same reason is surely something that makes you an enemy of your own country
The Declaration of Independence, the first Amendment, second Amendment, and fourth Amendment all disagree with you.
>That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
The People have the right to rise up against the Federal Government if it no longer serves the people. This requires that The People have the right to freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom from unwarranted search and seizure, and the ability to bear arms. America was founded in a revolutionary, on revolutionary ideals, and in such a way as to preserve the ability for future revolutions to occur.
**in a revolution
autocorrect gyped me out of a rousing rant
Nah he's right.
>Sir do ... in the first place.
*looks up from phone*
*Blank stare*
Where you talking to me?
>what's a computer?
>ein-cry-ption sounds sad, I don't want that
just be a complete retard and you'll be out in an hour
also
>what's plausible deniability
Uh, no. *spits in face*
>I got a score of One in 1999.
God says: sincere disastrous airplane distribution nosy marble zoo winter number trashy brake hot
Bad move. Now you're in for perjury.
urandom. You seriously want to take terabytes of random entropy from random? You know random blocks right, when it runs out?
NO OFFICER!
MESS WITH THE BEST.
DIE LIKE THE REST!
"I am exercising my right to remain silent with the exception of telling you that you may have this card."
[spoiler]My lawyer's information is on the opposite side[/spoiler]
>no, i'm suggesting that if your government truly is delinquent then it's your civil responsibility to renegotiate the lockeian contract by whatever means necessary. so, yes, UNIRONICALLY, "just incite a revolution, bro."
absolutely and thoroughly the most solid level of based and redpilled
>Governance is a compromise between liberty and safety.
and the total utilitarian value of a corporate surveilance state is almost no tangible increase in safety. if there actually was some upside to this then yeah sure it sounds great but in reality our society is getting boiled like a frog in a kettle because both corporations and the government are using that collected information to try and steer society in ways we haven't had to deal with before
Uhh I'm Jewish
bazigno