Privacy is great, but I feel that when a terrorist attack happens it's too easy for governments all over to start dismissing its importance and say "Come on, do you really not want to give any of your privacy away so we can keep you safe from terrorist attacks?! Really? REALLY??"
Now it's going to happen in Europe, too. We need to focus the discussion more on data protection. Because then the compromise isn't as obvious, and they would be talking about undermining data protection with their anti-encryption and anti-strong security legislation. People do want their data to be secure, even if most don't understand all the intricacies of it.
The US government (and UK, and France) currently holds the position that if you're a company you shouldn't be using encryption you can't decrypt. So basically they are also arguing against future technologies such as ZeroDB or homomorphic encryption, which could help a great deal against data breach.
That's just crazy. When companies get hacked left and right and millions of people's data is exposed each time, how can they possible hold that position? I think that's how we should argue against them.
Now it's going to happen in Europe, too. We need to focus the discussion more on data protection. Because then the compromise isn't as obvious, and they would be talking about undermining data protection with their anti-encryption and anti-strong security legislation. People do want their data to be secure, even if most don't understand all the intricacies of it.
The US government (and UK, and France) currently holds the position that if you're a company you shouldn't be using encryption you can't decrypt. So basically they are also arguing against future technologies such as ZeroDB or homomorphic encryption, which could help a great deal against data breach.
That's just crazy. When companies get hacked left and right and millions of people's data is exposed each time, how can they possible hold that position? I think that's how we should argue against them.