this post was submitted on 30 May 2024
77 points (97.5% liked)


17983 readers
2228 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!


  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:


World News

Business News

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
top 15 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 48 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

How about broad privacy laws in the citizens interests regardless of origin?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Everyone knows that if a member of the PRC's secret police took a plane to LAX they'd be physically unable to write malware or backdoors. America has a circle of protection cast over it that prevents malicious actors.

Obviously, yea, we should empower an agency to check all software for backdoors... and, ideally, they should be checking for shit from the NSA too.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Software is easy. It's the hardware backdoors that are hard to find, and those have been being built for at least a decade. They were pretty simple to start; I can't imagine what they're capable of hiding in 5nm process chips.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

The hardware backdoors are pretty difficult to find... but I object to your statement that software is easy. The obfuscated C contest is a wonderful demonstration.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

You know the best way to analyze a submission to the OCCC? Compile it, then run the result through a disassembler. You get back far more readable code than the source.

But you're right; reading code isn't easy; I meant relatively. If you have government-level resources and can hire a bunch of experienced software developers to review source code, armed with a bunch if static analysis tools (NSA), you have a decent chance of finding malicious code in software. I know of no similar tools (and the automated software analysis tools are the important factor) for finding backdoors in hardware.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 weeks ago

Just for cars, though, right? If both cars and telecoms aren't allowed to freely sell our data to police how will the government continue violating our 4th Amendment rights?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 weeks ago

You expect the neo-liberals to actually do something useful?

[–] [email protected] 21 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Why just China? I don't trust any "connected" product regardless of country of origin.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

I'm not even really sure any of it is really about China. This AP article updating about the progress of the attempt to ban DJI drones suggests Autel as "Best DJI drone alternative". Autel, a Chinese company based in Shenzhen.

Edit: I suppose that could just be the author(s) making an error, but, given the focus on one company in the drone market and a total lack of evidence about security concerns, I just wonder if these aren't all just companies trying to buy market control through lobbying.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 3 weeks ago

I'd like to see a law that the owner can always see where data traffic is going from a product and selectively start or stop it whenever they want. Maybe this would make part our all of the product temporarily unusable or throw a flag somewhere else in the system depending on the purpose (as specified in prepurchase literature), but it should be transparently allowed. That's how consent works. I can dream

[–] [email protected] 10 points 3 weeks ago

Excited for this to lead to Chinese EVs that don't steal your data and far outpace US EV sales anyways.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 weeks ago

This is what these bozos are doing while the WH sends all my tax dollars to Israel