The US 'Earn It' Act Pressures For an End To Online Encryption - In the Name of Child Safety! It Looks To Be Just Another Power Grab.

US Government is being pressured to pass a sneaky piece of legislation that (once again) threatens the totality of online freedom and privacy. This time they are doing it in the name of preventing sexual predation on children. Clearly this is a topic that is highly relevant to users of HIVE and STEEM, plus anyone who values privacy and their own security (ironically, as we shall see, including children). As usual, this looks like a thinly veiled strategy to stifle online dissent and increase their own power and that of their cronies. Let's take a look.

As Wired covered recently, the 'Earn it' Act (Presumably not connected to Steemit inc.) seeks to move to centralise access to online information even more than has already been done. The guilt complexes and fears of so many people have already opened the door for the once mostly free internet to be a pale shadow of it's former self and to potentially limit the expansion and evolution of humanity in troubling ways. There would be no way that a government could even consider such draconian measures as continual surveillance of just about everyone, everywhere (as already exposed by US Gov whistleblowers such as Edward Snowden and William Binney) if the people of the nation were not oblivious, gutless and in lockstep denial enough to allow it to happen - and here we are.

The reality that many people are unable to even describe who Edward Snowden is, is testament to the success of the massive distraction operation that the mainstream media has been acting out for decades.

EARN IT?

A bipartisan pair of US senators today introduced long-rumored legislation known as the EARN IT Act. Meant to combat child sexual exploitation online, the bill threatens to erode established protections against holding tech companies responsible for what people do and say on their platforms. It also poses the most serious threat in years to strong end-to-end encryption.

source: wired

Ok, well - who wouldn't want to protect children, right? Surely only bad people.. hmm.

Though the principles the companies are pledging to adopt don't specifically impact encryption themselves, the event had an explicit anti-encryption message. The cumulative effect of this morning's announcements could define the geography of the next crypto wars.

Oh, sounds important.

Riana Pfefferkorn, the associate director of surveillance and cybersecurity at Stanford's Center for Internet and Society, outlined fears about the privacy and security implications of an earlier leaked draft of the EARN IT Act in January. After a preliminary assessment of the version of the bill introduced on Thursday, she told WIRED that she sees well-meaning revisions aimed at reducing concerns that EARN IT could violate First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendment rights related to speech, privacy, and lawful search. But she says the bill remains fundamentally problematic.

"I see this as being an attempt to cure procedural problems while throwing a bone somewhat to civil liberty, privacy, and security concerns," she told WIRED. "But looking at the additional language it’s clear to me that this is still going to be a vehicle for the attorney general to wage his war on encryption. And it's kind of a black box. One of my fears is if this were implemented, what’s to stop China from saying 'in addition to monitoring for child sex abuse images, turn this on for Uighur freedom activists too.'"

AHA.. OK, so by using people's emotional drive to protect children as a trigger, these anti-freedom empire builders in government get to try to shut down dissent. I see.

"Encryption remains the elephant in the room," James Brokenshire, the United Kingdom's security minister, said during the DOJ press conference. "I’ve got to say that putting our children at risk for what I believe are marginal privacy gains is something I really struggle to believe any of us want."

Really? The UK 'security minister' claims that encryption only provides 'marginal privacy gains'? Haha.. Does he think we are all brain dead? How's that military without encryption working out for you? Or how about the financial system without encryption? How about all those private, multi billion dollar business deals being broadcast unencrypted? Clearly, at best, he can only mean that corporations, military and other 'authorised' people will have access to strong encryption, but social networks and 'the public' won't - so that we can 'be kept safe'.

In essence, this is all about power balance. The controllers know that the artificial hierarchy they rely on to feel big and strong is under threat from the wider world who are wanting their power back and are done with being under the yoke of those who too often seek to enrich themselves and crush everyone else. Understandable really. It is despicable to me that these 'people' would try to use the sexual predation of children as an excuse to gain personal power. Perhaps I shouldn't be so surprised though, since:

• It has been proven that the UK and US government (plus NASA and numerous other similar groups) have a FAR higher percentage of child rapists among their ranks than the general population.
• Jeffrey Epstein's case has exposed how far the governments of many nations are embroiled in child abuse and are being blackmailed.
• The loss of end to end encryption allows a massive centralisation of power to take place, in face of growing movements to decentralise the web being led by technology sectors such as cryptocurrencies, blockchains and social ecosystems such as HIVE.

How Can We Really Defeat Child Abuse?

Child abuse is clearly one of the most serious problems facing humanity today. To solve any such problem means going deep and going to it's roots - to the causal factors involved. This kind of deep awareness and deep change is exactly what the modern 'healthcare' and 'governance' systems seem to be allergic to, as they repeatedly introduce ineffective measures to temporarily deal with symptoms.

The bottom line is that child abuse would not take place at all if:

• People lived from their heart and were self empowered and honest.
• People were raised to value themselves and the sentience/free will of children.
• People made self exploration and evolution a priority instead of watching TV.
• People supported decentralisation that can lead to personal empowerment, rather than passing off personal responsibility to centralised power 'authorities' who can be corrupted and commit horrific evil in the shadows with no fear of being discovered.
• Genuine child abusers were deeply understood and helped to evolve or otherwise genuinely separated from society in a transparent way that cannot be corrupted by corrupt governments. e.g. False accusations of child abuse are a very effective way for corrupt political strategists to dispose of opponents.

Clearly this is one of the most complex challenges faced on Earth - how can we both have liberty and also protect children when they can be born at will and are meant to be freely guided by their parents and their own will?

While the full scope of the answers here are well beyond the scope of this post (though CAN be answered in full), what is easy to demonstrate is that the solution to this problem is NOT to lose all privacy and encryption! As an example, you can see in the following recent documentary from VICE, how organised child abusers can be and are caught online, despite the presence of encryption:

Loss of encryption is likely to put more people at risk than it will help and ultimately only means that corporations and governments will gain power over the will of the people. From my perspective, the motives of anyone pushing for this needs to be carefully examined.

Wishing you well,
Ura Soul