re:publica 2012 - Eben Moglen - Freedom of Thought Requires Free Media
Why Hacker News recommends it
HN users recommend Moglen as a brilliant speaker and a top introduction to free software philosophy, and cite this talk in privacy and crypto-wars discussions.
What it is
Eben Moglen's re:publica 2012 talk argues that media which spy on and data-mine the public threaten freedom of thought, and that free technology and free culture are needed to protect it.
Recommended by 2 HN commenters across 2 different months, 2012 to 2022.
What Hacker News said
Strong rec belorn · 2015-03 · on “Dear Dr. Stallman: An Open Letter”
When it comes to well formulated talks about free software, none seems to beat those from Stallman's lawyer, Eben Moglen. He knows very well how to speak to a crowd, and tends to use local references and languages to explain concepts (professor of law and history of law). Stallman has excellent skills in seeing problems in software before they get noticed by everyone else, but when I want to introduce someone to the philosophy of free software I would rather put on a talk like Freedom of Thought Requires Free Media from 2012 or the now 11 year old talk Die Gedanken Sind Frei from 2004. 1: [this video] 2: [LINK]
Recommends brabram · 2012-11 · on “Megaupload Assisted FBI vs NinjaVideo, But Evidence Then Used Against Them”
Just take a look at Eben Moglen[0], he is a very brilliant speaker and a brilliant man in general. Or Jérémie Zimmermann[1] for the European side. Or Benjamin Bayart for the French side. [0] [this video] [1] [LINK] [2] [LINK] (in french)
Cites arca_vorago · 2017-03 · on “VPNs are not the solution to a policy problem”
> We have police, laws, community rules, all of these things to protect our houses and personal security. If you leave the door unlocked, robbing it is still a crime. Likewise, if you walk around on an unsafe neighbourhood and get robbed, it would be ludicrous to hear "well, the city warned you that part is unsafe, so the police isn't going to investigate" The irony of this statement is that this actually happens quite often in certain east of the track neighborhoods, especially when the victim is a minority. It goes to show that this attitude, while I don't agree with it, isn't so far from the reality as you might think. Coming from out west, this is one of the cultural reasons I am pro-gun
Cites arminiusreturns · 2019-12 · on “Show HN: HN Card, Hacker News Profile Overlay”
I tend to agree. I know you are referring to karma but it also applies to comments. A few times I've found myself doing the same and then chastise myself for it. I think making comment histories private might be a potential solution, some are moving for reddit to do this. I am honestly torn, as I progress in my career and life, as a sort of contrarian type, I get more and more worried some background check algo is going to find my presence on platforms, troll my history, and find some random comment from 5 years ago that might be controversial and blackball me for it, unbeknownst to me. On the other hand, I hate the idea that we increasingly self censor as we all become more aware of this. T
Cites arminiusreturns · 2020-11 · on “A court ruling in Austria could censor the internet worldwide”
> but (...) truly people need to be responsible for what they post online. I strongly disagree. Anonymity is an important and integral part of the internet and the free speech it enables. Moving towards this sort of thing will only be used for abuse and censorship. It saddens me how much this has become an accepted position, even on hn, and I'm quite tired of all the justifications for giving up important rights, anonymity is closely related to privacy for example, just because of some scarey boogeyman of the day. Anonymity offers the ability to criticize entities (governments, corporations, people), to communicate in ways more freely than otherwise, to discuss personal issues without fear,
Cites arminiusreturns · 2021-08 · on “Why I Wrote PGP (1999)”
From an old comment of mine on the topic: [this video] [1] 1. "In 1995, there was a debate at Harvard Law School – four of us discussing the future of public key encryption and its control. I was on the side, I suppose, of freedom. It’s where I try to be. With me at that debate was a man called Daniel Weitzner who now works in the White House making Internet policy for the Obama administration. On the other side was the then Deputy Attorney General of the United States and a lawyer in private practice named Stewart Baker who had been chief council to the National Security Agency, our listeners, and who was then in private life helping businesses to deal with the listeners. He then became, later o
Cites arminiusreturns · 2022-08 · on “Doomed to repeat history? Lessons from the crypto wars of the 1990s (2015) [pdf]”
From an old comment of mine on the topic: [this video] [1] 1. "In 1995, there was a debate at Harvard Law School – four of us discussing the future of public key encryption and its control. I was on the side, I suppose, of freedom. It’s where I try to be. With me at that debate was a man called Daniel Weitzner who now works in the White House making Internet policy for the Obama administration. On the other side was the then Deputy Attorney General of the United States and a lawyer in private practice named Stewart Baker who had been chief council to the National Security Agency, our listeners, and who was then in private life helping businesses to deal with the listeners. He then became, later o