21–30 of 42 posts
I think this is all about money really. EU lost the tech war so they try to make winners life so hard so that they could either squeeze more money from them or enforce some government supported - controlled inferior products to replace them. These may be the excuse key words: "protecting civil rights, hate speech, terrorism, privacy"
I think this is all about money really. EU lost the tech war so they try to make winners life so hard so that they could either squeeze more money from them or enforce some government supported - controlled inferior products to replace them. These may be the excuse key words: "protecting civil rights, hate speech, terrorism, privacy"
Similar with rules to traffic, the rules are there for the cops to make some pocket money not not for our safety /s I think is easy to see that you need to always had some new rules when someone finds a way to do harm to the society, I am sorry that the rules makes some billionaires have a few less billions.
And this is how FAANG ends up destroying democracy in Europe like our lobbyists destroyed our democracy in the US. These words are dangerous to the life of these companies. I can easily see (trillion dollar) companies starting various forms of political donations in EVERY country. Google cannot afford to lose its euro market, but google can afford to buy policies. EDIT: Whats the criticism? For the first time in huma…
Those words are essentially saying that France (and Europe) want to stop competing. Macrons words might put some inconvenience on Google et al. but the result will be that the US as a place to be for companies becomes even stronger.
I'm saying that as we have seen again and again in history, money will influence politics.
Disappointed that Macron is following the old french playbook here. Was under the impression that he was a more of a liberal guy. Unfortunately german conservatives are useless when it comes to internet regulation (see "Mitstörerhaftung", making platforms and operators of wifi access points liable if their users commit crimes), not sure how much resistance can be expected.
> Mitstörerhaftung Without knowing anything about what that is, I'm having a lot of trouble looking up anything about what that is. Most of the links about that seem to be in German, and the ones in English are talking about it too tangentially to get any meaning from context clues.
In relation to Wifi, this so far meant that if someone torrented a movie or uploaded music without license over your wifi, you'll get a free court visit too and possibly a fine. That made operating an open and free wifi hotspot a legally fairly risky problem (lots of free wifi here still has very aggressive content filtering). The law responsible was discontinued in october last year.
This has been recently confirmed by the BGH (some high court in germany, the case was from before the law was ended but the changed law was taken into consideration), though you're not entirely off; the court can rule that you need to install a site filter and prevent torrenting or even put up a password on your wifi if there is too much disturbance caused by activity on your hotspot.
And this is how FAANG ends up destroying democracy in Europe like our lobbyists destroyed our democracy in the US. These words are dangerous to the life of these companies. I can easily see (trillion dollar) companies starting various forms of political donations in EVERY country. Google cannot afford to lose its euro market, but google can afford to buy policies. EDIT: Whats the criticism? For the first time in huma…
Too bad campaign contributions are heavily regulated in Europe. It's a bit harder to buy politicians here.
Highly likely Ireland is going to be against this but its going to be a lot harder to restrain many of the French governments more outlandish proposals when the Brits leave.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those words are essentially saying that France (and Europe) want to stop competing. Macrons words might put some inconvenience on Google et al. but the result will be that the US as a place to be for companies becomes even stronger.
I am not saying this. I'm saying that as we have seen again and again in history, money will influence politics.
Disappointed that Macron is following the old french playbook here. Was under the impression that he was a more of a liberal guy. Unfortunately german conservatives are useless when it comes to internet regulation (see "Mitstörerhaftung", making platforms and operators of wifi access points liable if their users commit crimes), not sure how much resistance can be expected.
Mitstörerhaftung has lost it's bite, the latest court ruling makes network operators not responsible if someone commits a crime over their network. You might still get slapped with an order to block these sites but otherwise it's harmless now.
One of the major concerns of EU skeptics has always been the ability (and the gall) to push ambitious acts of centralized control by like-minded European leaders. And more likely that big players like Google/FB will just buy off protections from mega-regulators than actually be "reigned in" as it always happens
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Similar with rules to traffic, the rules are there for the cops to make some pocket money not not for our safety /s I think is easy to see that you need to always had some new rules when someone finds a way to do harm to the society, I am sorry that the rules makes some billionaires have a few less billions.
I think it's naïve to believe these decisions are completely free of political considerations, and that the Commissioners responsible are merely the purest of heart rule implementers - on the contrary, I'd suggest that those at the upper echelons of EU decision making are by definition extremely sophisticated political operators; if not, how could they end up in a position of such power?