Bitcoin Forum

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/business/article97299902.html


I think that they've missed something...
The unencrypted communications are part of the past and present, but no will not be part of the near future. They have to find better tools, not rules.

Only a fool would ask for this.  It will cause more terrorism... alas.. our "leaders" can barely turn on a computer and refuse to learn anything new or useful soo....

I'm concerned. I'm staying several months each year in France and Germany and I've already read several articles about it. The worst thing is that if they want to limit encryption, then it's a very small step to ban BTC. Fortunately, it seems perfectly impossible to block encryption.

Fight terrorism? Same old excuses. They have been trying to do something like this for a long time. And now with the recent attacks in europe the public may accept that justification. But it won't stop any terrorists. Or anyone who cares about privacy. Most will move to free open source alternatives. If they haven't already.

It's obviously a lame excuse, but as countryfree said, it's a step towards banning cryptocurrencies and (I'd add) god knows what other limitations to the honest citizen.
I feel like the politicians today are dumber and dumber. They don't see it coming, but people will get soon fed up with them.

Agreed. Open source p2p encrypted, time to tell good bye to those data harvesters. They will not be able to pass it... Too big too rules banks and financial services will not tolerate to have their data harvested... So I am waiting for them to receive the call for the cto of Goldman Sachs...

Don't forget they play dumb... And even if they are: it's not an excuse. Then put in the context of the take over of icann nothing good is coming...

Recently, I have noticed that the Western countries are electing very authoritarian rulers, who stand against personal freedom. Examples are Theressa May of England, Angela Merkel of Germany, Dalia Grybauskaitė of Lithuania, Park Geun-hye of South Korea, and Tsai Ing-wen of Taiwan. Soon we will be able to add Hitlery Clinton to this list as well.

Heh, I wouldn't say Donald (Duck) Trump(et) is better.
But you're right, I didn't think on that: lately somehow people seem to elect the ones that will certainly harm they more. I really hope that this will change soon.



Something else: I've just read this: http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/08/cisco-firewall-exploit-shows-how-nsa-decrypted-vpn-traffic/
And this makes more sense. Whatever encryption people will try to use, the Operating System will send the data to Big Brother before it's encrypted. This is the obvious next step, if it's not implemented already....

I think it's important to be realistic. A tool who could defeat the nsa is not yet to be available. Why? Because if the technology side is Unbreakable by them, if the target has enough value, it moved to human intelligence, i.e. Physical extraction.

The problem is more people like Hillary and co who I am sure would be willing to fight the nsa to kill the us constitution and bills of rights...

Then using a copyrighted Trojan horse is a bad idea for privacy... Like Windows.

Having private digital communications is something worth coding for.

If encryption is unreliable, then the bitcoin is unreliable.

They know where the terrorists are, all they have to do is go there and kill them. Rules are not going to change anything since these guys don't play by the rules. Sounds like the same old politico bullshit to draw out this conflict even further.

All I can see in whatever they are doing is just a way to feel themselves in the sense that so that the masses can say they are doing something. If they really want to tackle whatever they are claiming to tackle then they should go to the source of the issue and stop wasting time on frivolities of encryption or any ephemeral things...My opinion though...

The plan also shows French and German politicians have no guts. Everybody knows that all terrorists (in the western world) are muslims, so they could just ban islam, close down all their places of worship, and deport all muslims to muslim countries where they could all live happily forever and the terror problem would be solved. No need to block encryption. Alas, it's way too late to think of that. One minister in France is muslim, and London's mayor is muslim, too. So the open society will gradually loose it openness.

Didn't know breivik was muslim. Or that the neo nazis that did these https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosphorus_serial_murders and the cologne bombing were muslim. Or that the guys doing the pipe bomb attacks in northern ireland are muslim. Or that c18, white wolves and related groups are muslim. Etc.

Lol!
That's rather true. I'm looking forward the day we'll have engineers at the head of our states...
Then the country will be ruled by science and logic, that'll be the best era of humanity!

It doesn't work... Common sense and free market are the only sustainable path. Humans aren't averageable. There will always be the ones to create chaos in planning... Those acting voluntarily are even less problematic than the involuntary ones... Those, man, what ever the plan can crash anything... Specially the best plans...

I guess encrypted application developers should consider it, their duty to humanity or to assist in the destruction ISIS, but all Muslim terrorist group.

This won't stop terrorism. And it was never about stopping terrorism. It is just an excuse. Terrorism existed long before encryption was available in convenient apps. Terrorists will continue by using other ways to communicate like they did before. If they don't already do that. And you think this is needed to stop isis? Look at what happened when turkey thought the kurds might advance on isis territory. Moved in and cleared isis out immediately. No problem whatsoever. To destroy isis just stop funding and arming them. No need to give more power to the government.

I meant in the present times. During the last decade in the western world, all terror has been coming from muslim. I know the past was different, but I do not live in the past. Also, by terror, I mean people dying. In France and Germany, there's been people painting pigs on the walls of a mosque but I don't see that as terror.

Not sure you live in the present either:
breivik - 2011
bosphorus serial murders - until 2006
northern ireland - current: http://www.belfastlive.co.uk/news/belfast-news/northern-ireland-top-eu-target-10315447
c18 and related groups - probably current: http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/belfast-racists-threaten-to-cut-romanian-babys-throat-28484870.html

And here are a few more:
http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/IncidentSummary.aspx?gtdid=201208050006
http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/IncidentSummary.aspx?gtdid=201507230080
http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/IncidentSummary.aspx?gtdid=201002180013
http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/IncidentSummary.aspx?gtdid=200907290025
http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/IncidentSummary.aspx?gtdid=201511270001

You can say recent terror attacks in the west by jihadists have been the most deadly. That is probably true. But not the only type of terrorist attacks in the western world. And not even the most common type. According to europol for the year 2015 for example, out of over 200 terrorist attacks and attempted terrorist attacks in europe less than 20 were by jihadists. Can't you see this is just the latest excuse for them to do something they have been trying for a long time? Everyone is panicking about the muslims that are going to kill us all that they decided to try again.

I think of it a bit like this on 'limits on encryption'. As a lot of people spend many hours sometimes more time online than they do in real life it is like everybody would leave their house unlocked and allow video cameras in it that can be switched on at any time to "make sure you're safe" or so the government can see you aren't up to something you shouldn't be.

Obviously people don't want this and when the older generation die suggestions like these will become political suicide.

I guess we don't have the same definition of "terror" nor "in the present time".

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/belfast-racists-threaten-to-cut-romanian-babys-throat-28484870.html
This example is really laughable. One threat 7 years ago.

There's no more terror in Ireland. It's a very quiet country by all standards. Compare the deaths by irish nationalists in the past 5 years, to the deaths by muslims in the past 5 years. The ratio is probably around 1 to 100.

Yeah sure, free market is working just fine, I mean does anything happening currently is bad?
I mean, it's not like world economy is shrinking!

Generally no government acts in a terroristic manner towards their people. Why should they? They would be tearing down the profits they make in taxes. The government of Venezuela is finding that out right now.

The exception is when a people becomes too free. Free people don't pay taxes. So, their government has to terrorize them to get them to pay more taxes. The example of this lies in the US government doing the 9/11 thing to its citizens. Then they had an excuse to go to bigger war in the Middle East, which propped the banks up (through armament loans) which is propping all of America up in many ways.

France and Germany are trying to do similar things in their countries, but these countries have a different law format than the USA. So, it is not working quite the same way.

In fact, the UK is the only nation in Europe that has a law set-up similar to the USA. That's why they did the Brexit thing. And Brexit better be allowed to go through, or the British people will do drastic things to their government. Their legal system allows them to, whereas the legal systems of Germany and France don't.

8)

Let me guess: it is not terrorism if a muslim is not involved? Because I posted several examples of non-muslim terrorism and you ignored them all. All within a decade like you first asked. All classified by authorities as terrorism. At least 3 of those examples in the last 5 years like in your revised time frame.


Yes. One example if you ignore the others.


There aren't many deaths from terror attacks in northern ireland. Not the same thing as no more terror attacks.


I already said as much in my last post. Yes it is true that recent jihadist terror attacks have been the most deadly. But my point was that not all terrorism in the west is done by muslims like you said. In fact it is not even the majority as far as I can tell.

i share same ideas with you. western world wants to have rulers who behave dictatorially. I dont know what the reason for electing those oppressive rulers. Maybe, western civilization came to its end and it will collapse very soon because of those rulers.

The deadliest army in the world to be able to eliminate greedy creditors... He who owes trillions but has the biggest army will always find a suitable deal with his creditors... Or else.

That's damn retarded. This may be the stupidest way, I mean ifthey payed attention to who is entering their country they wouldnt have this problem in the first place...

bitcoin uses crypto, yes, but not encryption.

The current immigrant crisis will destroy the European Union (Brexit has already happened as a result of this influx, the next will be Frexit and Nexit). And in the United States, if Hitlery gets elected as the POTUS this November, secessionist movements will be in full swing in southern states such as Texas and Arizona. The end is near!

Time to check if the wood is drying well for the datcha;)

Same people claiming they don't want dictatorships are crying to get authoritarian laws forbiding Islam. ..
Funny how it's more "I want freedom but just for me" than "freedom is the right of all"...

You are trying to confuse others with your posts. I want freedom from Islamic authoritarianism. I don't want to live under Shakira law, where women and children are stoned to death for blasphemy. I want freedom for everyone, from dictatorships and religious fanaticism. And by the way, could you point any of my posts, which call for "forbiding Islam"?

Everyone knows that you are a xenophobic Islam hater why are you even hiding?

Atleast saddampuh has the decency to be a racist and Islam hater 100% of his time.

You support trump and the banning of Muslims in Europe and the US - there are basically  like hundreds of your post saying that.

If nobody dies, there's no terror. I haven't ignored any of your examples, I just didn't checked them all. What examples do you have in the last few years, with people dying?

Regarding peace and safety, I'm ready to bet that Ireland is a much safer place than France, even without accounting terror attacks in France.

More like if the terrorists are stopped it doesn't get attention. So you don't see it in the news. Terror attacks still go on regardless. Again, not the same thing as no terrorism.


2 of the examples I gave before were from the last year. Another from 4 years ago. All with deaths and injuries. More can be found if you bother to search.


Don't know if that is true or not. But not the point. You were wrong in what you had said and i was providing proof you were. That is all.

I also agree that the forces in countries like Ireland or Israel know much better what to do against terrorism. From prevention to what to do if it happens (even minimize the media coverage!!).
But that doesn't mean the countries are safer.

"Unsafe" is defined more on the terrorist's desire to go there and make boom. The fact that some countries can prevent 90% of terrorist attack means nothing if the attempts are 10x more than in another, weaker defended country.

I think that one of the safest places is Svalbard, but that doesn't mean I'd live there.

Sakha (Yakutia) Republic is a pretty safe bet... as soon as you leave Yakuts you are very soon on your own...  ::)

stupppppppiiiiiiiiiid !
One: you can't be sure of who enters because you can't block your whole territory.
Two: anyone can BECOME crazy/extremist or anything. In fact 90% of terrorists of the 5 last year's were already European citizens

Republic of Sakha is almost 5 times bigger than France as far as the surface area is concerned, and most importantly, the Muslim population there is roughly around 0.1% of that in France. Yes... it is a pretty safe bet. And you don't need any encryption as well. I really doubt whether they have broadband internet connection outside the city of Yakutsk.

So what recent examples do you have? I haven't seen your proofs. I keep on saying that the death ratio between muslim terror acts and acts from other terrorists is 100 to 1, and if you can't prove otherwise, my point is valid. And please don't argue with terror acts which supposed to happen but have been stopped before they actually happen. There's no terror without terror.

If you see globally I am pretty sure it's closer to 1000 to 1... Look at the blood bath in the Middle East and further east... It's almost 100 people killed each day by Islamic supremacists.