That's probably because they've been, or are being, bootstrapped to the logic of tyranny. This would be readily accomplished via interactions, influence and advisors of the military and defense establishment - these are not democratic. It's the natural and frighteningly logical progression of laws and enforcement. Sight begets power and unnatural sight begets unnatural cravings for yet more power.
As we are seeing play out in front of us - tyranny can easily and readily take hold beneath the appearance of, or perhaps even true, democracy. The onion is rotting.
You all realize that when the regime realized that the military had tapped the planet that they wanted in, right? Enter the Patriot Act. Enter LEAs. Enter equipment grants. Enter parallel construction. Exit stage left.
Can we just dispense with the formalities and call this duck a duck yet? When law enforcement gets unfettered, or barely fettered, access to each and every digital print you lay down then that's called tyranny, by default. And fuck-all any good intentions.
I'm not sure what they mean by hybrid. It might be a reference to events on the Crimea where the appearance of the people voting to separate from the Ukraine. From reports there did seem to be some level of the Crimean population in support of that move. If you can intercept the communications of the people then the more likely another event such as that can transpire.
For me it seems plain that Poland is the match to the powder and any attempt on Putin's part to strike that match would be disastrous, proverbial great Russian bear or not.
From the looks of it - threats or not - the people living in Poland are a lot less free today and tomorrow will never repay that particular debt.
I'm not exactly a walking moral compass but it strikes me as awkward and ineffective that our focus on "preventing crime" is one focused exactly on punishment.
We have an overabundance of effective and non-intrusive means of "surveillance".
Why doesn't a sting have a first phase that attempts to break things up? What's the aversion to:
1. "Hey, tough guy, my friends think you're doing something stupid. You should probably not be this particular brand of stupid, ever.".
2. "Psst. Hey, I'm from law enforcement and I don't want to see bad things happen to good people, you or anyone else. I happen to know you're being watched. Some folks think you're a pretty evil guy and might blow shit up. So if you are then you're fucked but if you're not then now is a good time to stop pretending and find something else to do that will make you happy".
What the fuck's wrong with a warning? A little education can go a long way.
Pro-tip: Preventing crime is not a reaction. Nor is it gaining access to things you can not see. It's using what you have at your disposal to peacefully identify and diffuse a potentially life threatening situation.
Since when does "keeping us safe" equate to "Whatever I can bust, I bust! And if I can't bust it then I'm going to work it until I can. Boo-yah."?
Law enforcement has too much and everything they gain, collectively, we loose, collectively. Count on it.
Can I just say that the UK is at the tippety-top of my list of 'do not disturb' places? Absolute top. There's nobody disgusting me more on the entire planet than these guys right now - and there's some pretty disgusting shit going on.
What the fuck is it with these old white-guy countries? They're completely loosing their shit and taking down the planet in swaths.
It's like we've completely lost control of our senses and our governments are steaming head-strong into absolute positions of authority. So comfortably.
IP and FEAR, Baby! There will be ink.
Someone recently said to me "I'm just waiting for some country to get pissed off enough and drop one on us." and I replied "I'm just waiting for some people to get pissed off enough at their countries". I know I'm pissed at mine.
Not a useless discussion by any measure. Have you seen what law enforcement can do with prohibition? At all? They'd just as soon see countless lives destroyed for using "unauthorized" encryption as they have for using the pot.
Quite simply, law enforcement must not prevail and forcing speech out of Apple is only a very small portion as to why.
One day Like many gone by It will become Encrypt or die And this will hold true For you or I [sic, frig off, poetic licenseez] So smash it up And let if fly
I hate to keep beating a horse that simply will not die but the unholy alliances of media (including govs, if you like) have not, can not and never will "innovate". Hell, they can barely adapt and when they do adapt it's through crushing anything in their paths any way they can.
When the price of oil is high pirates have a go at it anywhere they can and when it's not pirates move on to more lucrative things.
Stop piracy - align your senses of entitlement with reality
Encryption is funny in the way that there is no soft, squishy middle part - apart from bad implementations.. which are more crumbly than squishy.
In other words, currently, there is no middle ground. There is no half-way. There is no ... "metric" that equates to "kind of" encrypted. Recognizing that is a pretty "key" part of any "discussion". Ignoring that is, well, ignorant.
Some of our corporate citizens can not seem to pay or provide for their own defenses or their business and customer data.
Critical information streams are fed onto the internet. Law enforcement and national defense have taken extreme liberties in their efforts to protect and to serve.
If the internet is so riddled with the means to bring on the imminent destruction of entire nations then we need to know. We need to know some specifics. The threat of the loss of a plane, a building, 10,000 men, women and children much less the risk of theft of money, identity or your loathsome grasp on art is not it. Militants claiming to comprise an ISIS is not it. Anonymous is not it. Global warming is not it. A fat hairy bastard in the basement diddling his way through NASA is not it.
Our government is all but completely trashing us. For what? Military contracts? Drugs? Pedophiles? What? .. The "law"? Chya, I think that ship sailed, Mr. Secret.
We need to know more and our government has been doing almost nothing but taking, on numerous fronts, for well over half a century. Look it up. It's time to give something back to the people if it is truly the people that they wish to serve. That may beg the question though, mightn't it?
No. We get corrupted Media, Mafiaa-assoes, forcible theft via monops & duops, health care, pills and the fucking po-lice. Meanwhile, I have two senators alll about intel co-ops and "OMFG we need some GD CYBERSECURITY up in here!" while articulating their ignorance with extreme dedication to their duties with smooth linguistic dexterity navigating the realms of politics, parties and re-election.
The "intel committees" in Congress? Tell me again why only a handful of people chosen to represent us all should know what's about to take us all out. Exactly. The entire intel outfit has become a joke and is becoming and extreme liability - and yet they remain free to keep on taking. Free of reigns, laws and oversight, proper oversight.
And if you're reading this and if offends you, your morals or your sense of duty (or inherent underlying vein of extreme greed) then fuck off. You know exactly what I'm talking about, don't you? Bitch.
I think it's a natural right. Movement. Movement via any of the capabilities inherent to your era of existence and these limited only by an ability to pay (shoes, horses, autos or fares). Governments like very much to exert control over this natural right and they exercise it frequently.
Guilty before proven innocent, unfortunately, has come to us in all sorts of new shapes and sizes. Apparently it's now OK to curtail the natural rights of "suspects", among others. So much for what I thought law and order was supposed to mean. "All men are created equal" except for when my bird can take out your wedding party and.. "I do"