Jeb Bush: crypto “makes it harder for the American government to do its job”

Y'know, because only "evildoers" want to protect their communications.

Read the whole story

 

[althaz]

sqlrob[/url]":34wlc7ur]

SixDegrees[/url]":34wlc7ur]I thought Jeb was supposed to be the "smart" brother?

He is.

That's disappointing, I was hoping he could be elected. If he's smarter (but still dumb), I'm less enthused. His brother was absolutely hilarious. Probably less funny if you're from the US I guess...

 

[bahromvk]

I am Canadian but this kind of stuff would have implications far beyond US borders. so worst of luck to you on this one, mr Bush.
I also really don't understand why he decided to open his mouth on this issue at all. What voter demographic is he after here? Most regular people won't know what the hell he is talking about and so won't be swayed one way or the other. Most mainstream tech savvy republicans will probably recognize the notion that encryption should be deliberately weakened or even forbidden as a terrible idea. Non mainstream? they are the ones most suspicious of the government already. Giving it more snooping powers should go down with that crowd like a lead balloon.

 

[RedRobin]

Sounds like GW more and more every day.

On the other hand, his words are a strong endorsement of encryption. We need full encruption on everything. Let them take it from us. At least we can put up some kind of fight.

 

[BajaPaul]

Weak crypto worked great for Ashley Madison users. I guess since they are cheaters and liars they deserved to be outed.

But Jeb, try telling that to all those OPM employees and contractors (unless they were on Ashley Madison too)....

 

[MonkeyT]

Jebbish: "NSA metadata collection is not a violation of anyone's freedoms..."

Collecting the data, may not be a violation. Reading it very often is.

 

[BSpiros]

solomonrex[/url]":2y7ssw6r]

NeoMorpheus[/url]":2y7ssw6r]Old Jeb, no need to do anything on your side, your buddies at microsoft already did the heavy lifting with windows 10, which is getting around the clock promotion from Ars.

So, don't worry, the info is on its way!

In all fairness, smartphones might be worse. Depends on the data you're after, I suppose.

Android has them covered here.

 

[BSpiros]

bahromvk[/url]":306ypda5]I am Canadian but this kind of stuff would have implications far beyond US borders. so worst of luck to you on this one, mr Bush.
I also really don't understand why he decided to open his mouth on this issue at all. What voter demographic is he after here? Most regular people won't know what the hell he is talking about and so won't be swayed one way or the other. Most mainstream tech savvy republicans will probably recognize the notion that encryption should be deliberately weakened or even forbidden as a terrible idea. Non mainstream? they are the ones most suspicious of the government already. Giving it more snooping powers should go down with that crowd like a lead balloon.

Everyone else hears "Whiney tech nerds are too lazy/liberal to let the good guys stop the evil terrorists". The fact that the actual issue is crypto has really no impact and I wouldn't be surprised if it actually made people focus on the 'evildoers' bit more since they can understand that part.

 

[CraigJ ✅]

RedRobin[/url]":ky12y5w8]Sounds like GW more and more every day.

On the other hand, his words are a strong endorsement of encryption. We need full encruption on everything. Let them take it from us. At least we can put up some kind of fight.

You can have my files when you pry them from my cold, encrypted hard drive. When encryption is illegal only criminals will have privacy.

Yeah, I guess encryption really is a weapon. /s

 

[Temetka]

Quiet Desperation[/url]":1k745ko5]Ya done convinced me, Jeb.

[X] Trump

I just want to watch the world burn at this point.

I couldn't agree more. Hell at this point i'd put Gilbert Godfrey in office.

 

[phree]

He's offering 8 more years of unbridled government surveillance, endless war, carte blanche for the NSA, CIA and FBI to sift through your most sordid communications, and possibly - wait for it - another costly, dangerous, endless war with Iran. He's also bringing most of his brother's evil team back into power.

The saddest part of all is that there may be a slim majority of Americans who want these things and he could win the election in 2016. Beat him now or suffer in utter desparation while our country is permanently drained of all resources for 8 more years. Let's not let him win.

 

[Temetka]

DerHabbo[/url]":1ga0sl5p]I know Americans are stupid. Incredibly stupid even, but even we aren't stupid enough to vote for the stupidest Bush after the last one.

Are you sure about that?

Are you sure you're sure?

 

[bthylafh]

Temetka[/url]":1d2zfd3g]

Quiet Desperation[/url]":1d2zfd3g]Ya done convinced me, Jeb.

[X] Trump

I just want to watch the world burn at this point.

I couldn't agree more. Hell at this point i'd put Gilbert Godfrey in office.

God, can you imagine him giving speeches?

 

[Deleted member 14629]

bthylafh[/url]":majlhzrr]

Temetka[/url]":majlhzrr]

Quiet Desperation[/url]":majlhzrr]Ya done convinced me, Jeb.

[X] Trump

I just want to watch the world burn at this point.

I couldn't agree more. Hell at this point i'd put Gilbert Godfrey in office.

God, can you imagine him giving speeches?

Wow, I remember when he used to host USA Network's Up All Night show...

 

[MacdonaldTriad]

Do you want to make criminals? Because this is how you create criminals:

Say it all you want - "only criminals will do X". It's. Stupid because that is always true.

 

[FoneSkulker]

SixDegrees[/url]":1cnhaaar]I thought Jeb was supposed to be the "smart" brother?

Great way to toe the party line.

 

[bettercitizens]

“If you create encryption, it makes it harder for the American government to do its job..."

Encryption has already been created - typical Bush to get it wrong - he probably meant if Apple, Google, etc. enable strong encryption by default then a job that the GOV should not be doing without a warrant has been made harder. The public needs the best - strongest encryption that is continually evolving to protect our 4th amendment rights from these assholes that have created such over-reach.

The one thing that is concerning is the ruling in Virginia that if you secure your device with your fingerprint or other biometric you can be forced to unlock said device. Have to make sure one powers off the smartphone before the cops take it!

 

[rwxatc]

People say W was dumb as a box of rocks. I don't know if that's true.

I'm withholding judgement on whether JEB is dumber than his big brother until I get more data.

But the more he says, he looks more and more like an empty box.

 

[bettercitizens]

Zacpod[/url]":1hg0quf8]To quote something from another threat about this very thing:

SteveMB[/url]":1hg0quf8]
The invisible hand is flipping you the invisible finger.

Considering we're ostensibly living in a democracy, it's really a sad statement about just how out of touch our political body is. Fire them all - out of a cannon in to the sun.

LMAO - so long and thanks for all the laughs...

 

[psd]

So far, Bush has not proved himself to be particularly technologically adept during the presidential campaign.

Disappointing ad hominem, not that I'm inclined to defend any of the Bushes. This is not about technology and ones adeptness to it is not a dis-qualifier to the debate at hand. Its a tacit acknowledgement that ones position is weak on the merits.

 

[심돌산]

I would never have voted for Jeb Bush anyway because nobody who is a close relative of a previous officeholder should ever be elected. But I guess having yet another reason to not vote for him is ok.

 

[soulsabr]

I saw Jeb Bush and instantly started crying a little inside. I read the article and found I was justified.

 

[soulsabr]

심돌산[/url]":3tlew2ih]I would never have voted for Jeb Bush anyway because nobody who is a close relative of a previous officeholder should ever be elected. But I guess having yet another reason to not vote for him is ok.

This is a very false statement. Why should you or I be disqualified from office simply because our brother or mother held the office? Why does that make us unsuited for the job? Jeb Bush is unsuited for the job of president for a near unlimited number of reasons; being Georgie's brother or other Georgie's son isn't one of them.
.
.
.
.
Granted, in his case, it really is strike six of three against him but still.

 

[soulsabr]

FoneSkulker[/url]":c7hmx2dv]

SixDegrees[/url]":c7hmx2dv]I thought Jeb was supposed to be the "smart" brother?

Great way to toe the party line.

Toe the line? It is quite possible that SixDegrees is correct. Being the "smart" brother doesn't, in fact, MAKE him smart. Hell, I've met rocks that are smarter than both Bush's combined.

 

[omarsidd]

NSA doing its job would by definition mean following the law, and we know for a fact that it has skirted and broken the law, using secrecy rules and a compliant government (and apathetic public) to avoid being challenged on the fact.

So yeah, if NSA were doing its jobs, maybe there's something to talk about. But as it is, snowball's chance...

That's even before getting to the really obvious "never build in a backdoor because anybody else could use it also".

 

[tlambert]

The "evildoers in our midst" are the reason we need strong encryption. The pervasive surveillance is so far on the wrong side of "the middle ground".

Let's start, instead, by you making it illegal to perform warrantless searches of electronic devices by the police in general, and agents of the federal government, such as the TSA at border checkpoints; it's already unconstitutional search, but there needs to be some teeth behind it.

Otherwise, even if you get companies to stop including it in devices like cell phones by default, we're going to build it anyway, and the people who are going to be installing it will be the technically savvy, their friends and family, a bunch of other people, any time an article comes out, cheating spouses, and the bad guys.

In other words, you aren't going to stop the bad guys having it, so why stop the good guys having it?

 

[심돌산]

soulsabr[/url]":173bouri]

심돌산[/url]":173bouri]I would never have voted for Jeb Bush anyway because nobody who is a close relative of a previous officeholder should ever be elected. But I guess having yet another reason to not vote for him is ok.

This is a very false statement. Why should you or I be disqualified from office simply because our brother or mother held the office? Why does that make us unsuited for the job?

you might be well suited for the job, if your talents, abilities, and politics were considered in isolation, but close relationship to a previous officeholder makes you unsuited, because family dynasties are poisonous to democracy.

It is fundamentally unfair and antidemocratic, that you get a leg up merely because your close relative was a previous officeholder. Really this should be obvious. George W. Bush never would have been president if George H.W. Bush hadn't already been president.

Just as human society depends on the death of old people to change and advance (imagine no new professorships ever because all of the positions are permanently occupied), so also a healthy democracy requires fresh talent, not the same old families trading places in office.

 

[UltimateLemon]

심돌산[/url]":19jp4c6n]

soulsabr[/url]":19jp4c6n]

심돌산[/url]":19jp4c6n]I would never have voted for Jeb Bush anyway because nobody who is a close relative of a previous officeholder should ever be elected. But I guess having yet another reason to not vote for him is ok.

This is a very false statement. Why should you or I be disqualified from office simply because our brother or mother held the office? Why does that make us unsuited for the job?

you might be well suited for the job, if your talents, abilities, and politics were considered in isolation, but close relationship to a previous officeholder makes you unsuited, because family dynasties are poisonous to democracy.

It is fundamentally unfair and antidemocratic, that you get a leg up merely because your close relative was a previous officeholder. Really this should be obvious. George W. Bush never would have been president if George H.W. Bush hadn't already been president.

Just as human society depends on the death of old people to change and advance (imagine no new professorships ever because all of the positions are permanently occupied), so also a healthy democracy requires fresh talent, not the same old families trading places in office.

Let's make an exception this time. If we have to take out Hilary Clinton as possible runner, Donald Trump might become your next President. That would be a global catastrophe.

 

[psd]

tlambert[/url]":1oanasjm]

In other words, you aren't going to stop the bad guys having it, so why stop the good guys having it?

You may not stop the bad guys but you don't have to help them either. If helping the good guys necessarily also helps the bad guys, society has a serious adult moment it cannot get wrong.

 

[DrLOAC]

Brevitic[/url]":3o42o2pi]Jeb apparently never saw the classic episode of TNG "The Drumhead"

What a coincidence. This episode was just on BBC AMERICA and I was just thinking how relevant it still was.

 

[심돌산]

UltimateLemon[/url]":f0qkdgo8]

심돌산[/url]":f0qkdgo8]

soulsabr[/url]":f0qkdgo8]

심돌산[/url]":f0qkdgo8]I would never have voted for Jeb Bush anyway because nobody who is a close relative of a previous officeholder should ever be elected. But I guess having yet another reason to not vote for him is ok.

This is a very false statement. Why should you or I be disqualified from office simply because our brother or mother held the office? Why does that make us unsuited for the job?

you might be well suited for the job, if your talents, abilities, and politics were considered in isolation, but close relationship to a previous officeholder makes you unsuited, because family dynasties are poisonous to democracy.

It is fundamentally unfair and antidemocratic, that you get a leg up merely because your close relative was a previous officeholder. Really this should be obvious. George W. Bush never would have been president if George H.W. Bush hadn't already been president.

Just as human society depends on the death of old people to change and advance (imagine no new professorships ever because all of the positions are permanently occupied), so also a healthy democracy requires fresh talent, not the same old families trading places in office.

Let's make an exception this time. If we have to take out Hilary Clinton as possible runner, Donald Trump might become your next President. That would be a global catastrophe.

I won't be voting for him, but I can certainly think of worse candidates. His refusal to toe the line is refreshing. I can imagine him after inauguration being briefed about "the way things are done" and him just saying "Fuck off! I'm the president of the United States and I'm going to do whatever the hell I want to, however the hell I want to!"

And that would, in general, be a good thing -- even though maybe not in his particular case.

 

[Avid Computer User]

Dilbert[/url]":1jj5jwtd]Wait a minute..... Jeb? The Jeb? We need to get him to work for NASA. Upside first man on Mars. Downside (for him) first permanent inhabitant of Mars.

His supportors are just a few too many steps behind the curb.

 

[sglover]

I didn't say I wasn't going to vote for him. But it doesn't matter. My state is so red that all the delegates will vote Republican, pretty much no matter what. And if I vote for him in the primary it won't count anyway.

Whoa.... You **really** need to review your high school civics.

Red state or blue, the action now is in the **party primaries**. It doesn't matter if your state Democratic Party is three guys and a post office box -- it's going to send delegates to the national DEMOCRATIC convention. If your state Dem primary is sending delegates to the Republican convention, you'd better write it up and copyright it pronto, because that's one helluva front-page story you've got there.

In fact, you could make a case that by casting a ballot in the primary of a minority party, your vote carries MORE influence that usual. So it's doubly foolish to waste the opportunity.

In any case, given the unique (often bizarre) dynamics of this election, it's a weird kind of cynical naivete to write off Sanders. It's true that he faces long odds, and that his opponents can draw from the pockets of their billionaire owners. But not a single one of those opponents attracts any real loyalty, and every one of them -- Clinton AND the Republican clown car -- are all mouthing the same corporatist platitudes. Sanders has a real shot at going all the way.

 

[lorinkundert]

With that statement you lose any chance of earning my vote

 

[sglover]

CraigJ[/url]":1vgt9yjy]

I can't vote in primaries because I refuse to join a party. I will probably do all those things. But he still doesn't have a chance. The big money machine will be behind Clinton. Bet on it.

The fuel that **really** propels the Clinton campaign is that kind of content-free, bogus resignation. If you were paying attention at all, you'd know that HRC's campaign is getting a lukewarm response at best, and it's cooling daily. Questions about whether she should run at all are becoming as prominent as questions about her policies.

What's the point of "refusing" to join a party? "Joining" a party, registering as a Republican or Dem or Green or Libertarian, is just about the most consequence-free civic action possible. But by not joining all you do is negate your own say about candidate selection (at least in states with closed primaries, which is the only sensible way to run them).

 

[ApotomoRose]

maxmurder[/url]":25zwf935]We may need to take a hint from Kerbal Space Program here:

Put Jeb in rocket,
launch rocket into deep space never to return.

I would actually prefer Jeb Kerman over Jeb Bush as president, at least the green one wouldn't defund NASA into irrelevance.

I'd vote for him (the green one)!

 

[rmm200]

Jeb would have a lot better chance to be elected if he would just keep his mouth shut. He just completely alienated a whole bunch of people - like me - that he had no need to alienate.

 

[Seraphiel]

bthylafh[/url]":2tjx90yh]

Temetka[/url]":2tjx90yh]

Quiet Desperation[/url]":2tjx90yh]Ya done convinced me, Jeb.

[X] Trump

I just want to watch the world burn at this point.

I couldn't agree more. Hell at this point i'd put Gilbert Godfrey in office.

God, can you imagine him giving speeches?

His version of The Aristocrats is at least more coherent than anything Trump has said so far.

And it would actually work as a foreign policy.

 

[Midnitte]

MonkeyT[/url]":2xg1la2a]

Jebbish: "NSA metadata collection is not a violation of anyone's freedoms..."

Collecting the data, may not be a violation. Reading it very often is.

A Federal Appeals Court disagrees about that.

 

[matthewslyman]

Jeb Bush apparently thinks that e-commerce and electronic banking are evil, and a retrograde step for the US economy.

 

[CppThis]

UltimateLemon[/url]":3edn9qoj]Let's make an exception this time. If we have to take out Hilary Clinton as possible runner, Donald Trump might become your next President. That would be a global catastrophe.

The Donald is a fruitloop with no real plan but I can't imagine him being any worse than Cersei Rodham Lannister, Yet Another Damn Bush, or Totally Not Like Other Socialists. Maybe the actual third parties will come up with something decent?