Comment by sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works on Kaspersky: Biden administration preparing to prevent Americans from using Russian-made software over national security concern

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.

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

Can’t wait for the EU to ban Facebook :(

I mean, yeah? I’m down!

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.

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

No, that’s not liberty. If the average user would have any way of detecting when software is doing nefarious thighs, then sure, you’d be right, but the average user can’t possibly know that software is misbehaving just like they couldn’t have possibly known that asbestos or lead was bad for them. Software is opaque. As long as it remains opaque, consumers are unsuspecting victims and need help.

average user can’t possibly know

Hence the information campaign to make people aware.

Look at cigarettes, they are harmful and therefore have a strong information campaign to inform the public. I highly doubt you’ll find anyone today who isn’t aware of the dangers of smoking, but just 100 years ago, it was considered classy and largely innocuous. The difference was a big information campaign to counter the tobacco lobby’s attempts to spin smoking as somehow healthy.

The government’s role should be to make opaque things transparent, not to bad things that could be harmful. At the same time, they can spy on other countries to get an idea of what types of control they can exert, which would help them better inform the public.

But at the end of the day, it’s up to the individual what they choose to believe. Liberty is having the freedom to make poor choices, and to live with the consequences. The government’s role should be to earn our trust, but they violate it at every opportunity in the name of “security” (NSA, TSA, etc). Yes, a lot of people will ignore it, and that’s a part of having liberty.

Hence the information campaign to make people aware.

There are still those who think the lunar landing didn’t happen so this is not a valid option for something that might pose an immediate danger to society.

But at the end of the day, it’s up to the individual what they choose to believe. Liberty is having the freedom to make poor choices, and to live with the consequences.

Government backed malicious software is not just dangerous to the user, it’s a societal level threat. And unlike smoking, which is banned wherever it poses a danger to more than just the smoker, there isn’t a way to restrict usage in a way in which it only affects the user.

immediate danger to society

But what exactly is the definition of that?

For example, which of these meet that definition:

an antivirus that ignores viruses from the county of origin
a social media app that collects data from a device and sends it home
a social media app that likely promotes content with a specific political agenda the government doesn’t like
an app that hides monetary transaction details, which is commonly used by terrorists and other criminals
a social media app that doesn’t id users and allows criminals to use it to communicate

The first two are probably the initial targets, but a law enforcement agency could make a decent case for the rest. Where does it stop?

That’s why I think we need a hard limit on government authority here. It’s better for some bad stuff to propagate than for the scope of what’s blocked to expand and effectively limit freedoms of speech, association, press, etc.

Government have a lot of tools at their disposal, I honestly don’t think banning software needs to be one of them.

The cost of liberty and freedom is eternal vigilance from those who want to harm us, and those who claim to protect us.

Side tangent, but your oopsie of Nefarious Things to “Nefarious Thighs” fucking FLOORED me xD Wish I could detect nefarious thighs!

Hah! I’m not changing it

Sounds like a George Michael song to go along with Careless Whisper.

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.

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.

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.

You do just as you did. Tell people and let them make up their minds. Posts like yours convinced me in the past and it will others in the future .

I’d still use it if my friends and most of the people I know do

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

Our Rules

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

Kaspersky: Biden administration preparing to prevent Americans from using Russian-made software over national security concern | CNN Politics(edition.cnn.com)

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Our Rules

Approved Bots

Community stats

Community moderators