100%? Impossible. But they can effectively ban it.
Pass a law that makes any US company, or company doing business in the US, not allowed to host E2EE-enabled apps. This now bans them from the App Store and Play Store. 99% of users won’t find or choose to side-load for android users. Then they can make E2EE actually illegal to distribute in the US. They’ll almost never bother going after individuals, but this effectively makes hosting a US-based website unable to distribute E2EE programs. So people will need to use foreign sites. Which the US can force ISPs to block via a whack-a-mole on individual sites.
This isn’t very likely, but hell Congress was decently close to banning TikTok for no real reason so who knows?
Oh yeah. There’d either be carve-outs or congress would just knee-jerk against encryption (like they’ve nearly done before) and deal with the consequences later.
Care to explain the difference? Google is struggling to bring up adequate definitions for carve-out, or why it’s different to caveat, and I see multiple sources using both, sometimes interchangeably.
I mean, you’re the one claiming dumb Americans can’t pronounce English.
Caveat is a noun. It’s a really old word, literally from ancient Latin meaning “let him beware.” Basically a warning, often noting that while something may seem great, there is often a notable problem.
A carve out is a simple compound, and typically a verb, but can be used as a noun as seen above. It notes an exception (typically to a policy, practice, or law), often one specifically framed to benefit a specific group, at the expense of others.
For example: “Congress’ new law creates strong regulations for CO2 emissions, but before you get excited, there’s one caveat: there are carve outs for automotive manufacturers, who won’t have to abide by those regulations until 2030.”
A carve out is a simple compound, and typically a verb, but can be used as a noun as seen above. It notes an exception (typically to a policy, practice, or law)
caveat
/ˈkavɪat/
noun
a warning or proviso of specific stipulations, conditions, or limitations.
‘there are a number of caveats which concern the validity of the assessment results’
Emphasis mine.
I understand now the purpose of it. Normally in non-americanised English, using your example, caveat is used as follows:
“The deal has a caveat that x gets y” where caveat covers both meanings.
But that’s been Americanised because you’re separating those meanings effectively saying “There’s a caveat, the caveat is x gets y” as, “There’s a caveat, the carve out is x gets y”.
So, it isn’t that your TV personalities couldn’t speak, it’s because your contract writers were semi-literate.
I don’t know how the government will be able to effectively ban E2EE and honestly I want to see them try
100%? Impossible. But they can effectively ban it.
Pass a law that makes any US company, or company doing business in the US, not allowed to host E2EE-enabled apps. This now bans them from the App Store and Play Store. 99% of users won’t find or choose to side-load for android users. Then they can make E2EE actually illegal to distribute in the US. They’ll almost never bother going after individuals, but this effectively makes hosting a US-based website unable to distribute E2EE programs. So people will need to use foreign sites. Which the US can force ISPs to block via a whack-a-mole on individual sites.
This isn’t very likely, but hell Congress was decently close to banning TikTok for no real reason so who knows?
It seems like the great firewall in china, really scary times for the freedom of the web
More like the midly warm pot, as vpns will still be legal
https://mashable.com/article/montana-tiktok-ban-what-to-know
Montana’s GOP didn’t get the memo that it’s a stupid idea.
I’m confused though. Don’t banking/ finance apps require E2EE ?
Also Password Managers, VPNs? Do these apps not need E2EE by default?
Oh yeah. There’d either be carve-outs or congress would just knee-jerk against encryption (like they’ve nearly done before) and deal with the consequences later.
Why do Americans say carve-out, is it because illiterate TV media personalities couldn’t pronounce caveat?
Because they mean different things.
Care to explain the difference? Google is struggling to bring up adequate definitions for carve-out, or why it’s different to caveat, and I see multiple sources using both, sometimes interchangeably.
I mean, you’re the one claiming dumb Americans can’t pronounce English.
Caveat is a noun. It’s a really old word, literally from ancient Latin meaning “let him beware.” Basically a warning, often noting that while something may seem great, there is often a notable problem.
A carve out is a simple compound, and typically a verb, but can be used as a noun as seen above. It notes an exception (typically to a policy, practice, or law), often one specifically framed to benefit a specific group, at the expense of others.
For example: “Congress’ new law creates strong regulations for CO2 emissions, but before you get excited, there’s one caveat: there are carve outs for automotive manufacturers, who won’t have to abide by those regulations until 2030.”
caveat /ˈkavɪat/ noun
a warning or proviso of specific stipulations, conditions, or limitations. ‘there are a number of caveats which concern the validity of the assessment results’
Emphasis mine.
I understand now the purpose of it. Normally in non-americanised English, using your example, caveat is used as follows:
“The deal has a caveat that x gets y” where caveat covers both meanings.
But that’s been Americanised because you’re separating those meanings effectively saying “There’s a caveat, the caveat is x gets y” as, “There’s a caveat, the carve out is x gets y”.
So, it isn’t that your TV personalities couldn’t speak, it’s because your contract writers were semi-literate.
What were you saying about my English competency?
All the government needs is copies of the keys. Encryption remains in place for everybody else, so it is … Plausible.
All these encryption bans are specifically encryptions thee governments cannot decrypt.
Ah that males sense. Thanks for clarifying.
its like banning math
Tories are just trying to kick up as much shit as possible before they’re kicked out so they can blame the next party for the fallout.
Seems like something politicians who have not touched a computer would try to pass
You really think things will be different if you’re under a different colored heel? 🤣