1y ago

A Proposed Law Would Force Internet Companies to Spy on Their Users for the DEA | The Cooper Davis Act would force tech companies to report suspected drug activity to the government. Experts say it...

gizmodo.com A New Bill Would Force Tech Companies to Report Their Users for Drugs

The Cooper Davis Act would force tech companies to report suspected drug activity to the government. Experts say it would be a disaster for digital privacy.

160 comments

it's never about the drugs, it's never about the kids, it's never about the anything
- It's about the money and power.
  
  With a seasoning of hate.
- Truer words were never spoken
- Yep, "they do it for that" and not to do the same as they did with dotcom

I love living in the freedom country, not like those other, nonfreedom countries where shady unnacountable secret police organizations spy on you all the time.

jesus fucking christ that's dystopian
tell ballsack shaver to fuck off

Fucking Jeanne Shaheen. I'm from NH, I've unfortunately had to vote for her repeatedly. She is going to go to her grave an unrepentant drug warrior. I absolutely loathe the Clinton generation of neolib Democrats, they cannot die off fast enough.
- She also voted against student loan debt relief multiple times, unsurprisingly.

Wow it’s crazy what happens when you have idiots in important positions.

This won't stop drug sales, it'll just make them sneakier. Fools.

I’ll just leave this here
Edit: I misinterpreted - I thought this was focused on ISPs and identifying customers that go to sketchy marketplace sites through inspection of DNS logs. If you’re buying drugs on Facebook market place or something like that and are not expecting to get caught… have fun in prison, I guess? It’s Meta. You don’t have privacy on their products. If you do sketchy shit on any of their platforms, you should expect to get caught.
- I don’t think a pi-hole will help with that.

Combating drugs is good, spying is not good, you need a very transparent law that tackles the issue in a smart way.
EDIT: Why the downvotes? Is this a pro-drugs community?
- Because the war on drugs was lost before our government (or any government) even started fighting it.
  The DEA is neither necessary or helpful. Legalizing and regulating drugs - and yes, I do mean all drugs - would do far more to improve safety for people who want to, for one reason or another, use drugs (and “drugs” absolutely includes alcohol - it’s a substance that affects your mental state when consumed).
  Or, you know, we could actually correct the root cause, which is wealth inequality, general despair over much of what’s happening in the world these days, and endemic poverty and homelessness. But that wouldn’t be profitable, and supply-side Jesus wouldn’t like that.
- Simplistic sentiments like 'combating drugs is good' is exactly what leads to people to think spying on citizens should even be considered.
  
  What about pedophilia? Should we also let it go when we give up all investigations on drugs?
- combatting drugs is bad. it leads to a black market and unreliable product, resulting in overdoses & deaths
  
  A drug addict does not make any contributions to society, he's the living dead.
- Why, is this an anti-drug community?
- It is downvoted because you appear to think that more drug laws are the way to address the opiate addiction public health crisis.
  
  crisis
  Why is it a crisis? I thought you believed drugs were good!! Isn't it almost an utopic situation with all the opiate addicts around? Is this not what you were looking for?
- Gr8 b8 m8 I r8 8/8
- Down votes are because studies have shown that programs like DARE and the "war on drugs" didn't really make drugs go away, and that we need better solutions that address quality of life and mental health issues to keep people from turning to drugs in the first place. Also, saying we need to "combat" drugs is very adversarial, and reinforces the boogie man of "evil drug users", which helps the passage of overly powerful laws, and often make it easier to exploit minorities.
  I also think the simplistic "[let's just] tackle the issue in a smart way" might rub people the wrong way, like "oh, well why didn't we think of that?"
  EDIT: Your edit of "people don't agree with me, I guess that means they love drugs" is very assumptive, and close minded.
  
  and that we need better solutions that address quality of life and mental health issues to keep people from turning to drugs in the first place.
  You're almost there, one more step and you'll realize the true enemy is capitalism. Some of the weaker drugs can be legalized as long as they're kept in strict control.

160 comments