Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | Pazzaz's commentslogin

Literally nothing changes. This is the continuation of a temporary law that already existed.


It's not accessed on devices. This is about people using messaging applications, like Messenger. Then, as the message isn't encrypted, Meta can read the message on their servers. And with this law they are allowed to scan and sometimes report it to the government.


The citizens do have a say: they vote in elections. This is a temporary law that was implemented 5 years ago so everyone had a chance to vote in the 2024 EU election and vote out those who supported this law. But most people don't care if a company like Meta is allowed to scan their messages. For those who care, they can always use an encrypted messaging service like Signal or Telegram.


Yeah, right, this is just complete bullshit. Let's just put it this way: so, given that you more aware than "most people", did you at least vote against those who support it, and did you try to persuade your friends to do that, but they just didn't listen?

I really don't feel like I can affect anything at all. First of all, even if we assume for the sake of argument that voting for MEPs is important, it's really hard to judge what you are voting for. It's not like they come with clear agendas that people carefully evaluate before they decide how to vote. It's a long running joke how USA elections are choosing between "a giant douche and a turd sandwich", and whatever you choose doesn't even matter because they won't keep their promises, but, hey, at least everyone knows their promises. This one is blue, that one is red, both will let you down in the end, but you kinda know what their general vibe is. Voting for MEPs on the other hand — they are all kinda grey and I couldn't tell you how'd they vote on this particular issue. Depends on your country, but in my case many of them simply weren't MEPs on 2023 vote. And I'm kinda surprised by some of the choices.

Second, I don't really feel that MEPs are that important. They impact almost nothing. All real work is done behind the closed doors by some unknown people, and half of them all happen to be Maltese for some reason (0.1% of EU population, by the way). Parliament in the majority of cases just votes "for all good things and against all bad things" and the actual things that will come to haunt us are usually some small details in the Appendix that were never even explicitly put on the vote.

And when MEP's vote does matter, well, we get something like in this case. The majority objected, but that doesn't matter.

By the way, a couple of years ago I was asking myself, how could it be that we choose von der Leyen to be the President of EC? Well, I don't think we ever did. I surely didn't. MEPs barely did. Never once in all of the history EP rejected a candidate proposed by Council. Whatever each member of the Council did we'll never know, this is not disclosed. And to add the cherry on top, in this particular case it was a record number of MEPs who actually voted against her. It doesn't matter. Here we all are.


They don't need to use "illegal chat apps". They can just use Signal or Telegram, or any of the other ways that exist to send encrypted messages.


You don't need to do any work to circumvent this. This law is just continuing the status queue that's existed in the EU for 5 years.

To avoid being affected by this law, you can just download Signal, or use any other encrypted messaging service.


No, there is no law preventing anyone from encrypting their messages. The thought is that children won't use encrypted services.


> read: one person elected

No, they have 8 people elected: 3 in the region, 5 in the municipality.

They got 4,46 % of the votes in the region, and 7,92 % in the municipality. And who knows, maybe they'll use that 5 million SEK to get more seats in this years election.


> What's that? You say you want even more infuriating font stories? Well don't you worry, I'll be back soon with another diatribe about font thickness and antialiasing on the web on Mac vs. Windows.

Did he ever write about this? I can't see anything about it in his list of articles.


This probably isn't related to semantic CSS, but the "Semantic version" isn't working properly. If I open "https://nuejs.org/@spotlight/" and then click on an article, then try to return to the previous page, it will change the URL but not the page itself. This happens on both Firefox and Chrome.


No one is "already using Shor's algorithm". Wikipedia lists the largest numbers factored using Shor's algorithm on a real quantum computer as follows:

- The number 15 (5*3) was factored in 2001

- The number 21 (7*3) was factored in 2012

- An attempt to factor 35 (5*7) was made in 2019 but they didn't succeed because of accumulation of errors in the quantum computer.

Quantum computers today are very bad, so changing the algorithm probably won't change much.


There is an argument out there that the 15 and 21 factorizations involved built in knowledge of the answer. If you accept that then there has been zero progress demonstrated so far for factoring numbers using quantum effects, not just a ridiculously small amount of progress.


On the positive side, they haven't factored 17 and 19.


Is this a joke? Or...


So, less than one bit of progress per decade? That's not exactly huge progress...


At this rate, just 2510*1.5 years and we will crack all current AES. Hopefully we will be using 512 bit keys by then. 512 bits should be enough for anyone.


Shoes does not attack symmetric ciphers like AES.

Grover’s algorithm applies and will never be used against even AES 128.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: