Hi Luis--
On 03/13/2012 01:03 PM, "Luis A. Morán Morales" wrote:
I think this article is germane to the discussion and it clearly
illustrates one of the many reasons that we need the FreedomBox:
Yuck, what a terrible move by the school (and depressing to hear of the
capitulation of the girl's parents, if the school is to be believed).
But it's worth considering how a FreedomBox implementation could
actually withstand a comparable attack, given the weak legal position of
most schoolchildren (or the weak negotiating position of most
job-seekers, referenced in your later link).
How does (or how could) a FreedomBox help a user avoid giving up their
authentication credentials in the face of heavy-handed coercion by a
powerful authority figure? This is not a rhetorical question; i'd
really like to hear explanations or proposals!
It seems to me like FreedomBox would help the user by limiting the
authorities' ability to bypass the user entirely and demand access from
the service provider directly. That's a good thing! But the
authorities didn't bypass the user in this situation.
I haven't seen any proposals for how FreedomBox could help the user
themselves resist disclosure of their own credentials. Maybe i haven't
been following closely enough. i would be happy to be wrong, please
point me to them!
The situation is particularly scary because I consider what they did to
that girl a form of "thought crime" punishment simply because she
"thought out loud" by posting on Facebook.
"thinking out loud" is also known as "speech", which (while still
somewhat protected in some countries) hardly has the same protections
that thought does.
While i think the situation is atrocious, that the school system should
be ashamed of themselves, and that the girl and her parents should have
fought much harder to avoid handing over her authentication credentials,
it's a bit of a stretch to claim that this is about thought crime. The
school district wanted to know what the student had been communicating
with other people about, and they forced her to reveal it.
I think this is a pervasive-and-unjustified surveillance issue, which is
bad news in its own right; let's save the thought crime label for
situations where it fits better.
Regards,
--dkg
_______________________________________________
Freedombox-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss
