Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Messaging and chat control

patrick-breyer.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 336 posts

Re: Messaging and chat control

#21

Post by dylkil »

kristjank wrote: post #8
kleiba wrote: post #6

Privacy is something that people usually only care about on a theoretical level. Practically speaking, they're often happy to not care so much at all if they get something more tangible in return. --- Company: Excuse me, would you mind us profiling you through an accurate survey of most of your everyday purchases? Customer: Heck no! Company: What if we let you collect "points" that will maybe someday safe you a littl…

True. Although nothing-to-hiders will chime in quickly, stating that their shopping history isn't really that important to their sense of privacy.

They wouldn't like their neighbors knowing their shopping history, the principle should be the same.

Re: Messaging and chat control

#23

Post by qwerty456127 »

I wonder how much people there actually are who don't yet know child porn is a classic bullshit excuse governments use every time they want more control over the Internet. It's so classic, so blatant it feels cringy already. Not even for a second I would believe they do this to actually protect children.

Re: Messaging and chat control

#25

Post by petre »

the-dude wrote: post #11
ForHackernews wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Presumably they're referring to requirements for vaccinations to attend large public gatherings. I think it's an absurd hyperbole, myself.

> large public gatherings. In some counties it is much broader than that. Painting it as hyperbole sounds hollow if you are downplaying it yourself.

If the gathering is large enough they can't stop it and will back down. See the yellow vests movement.

Re: Messaging and chat control

#26

Post by herbst »

zibzab wrote: post #19
kristjank wrote: post #3

I think this isn't getting nearly enough traction, especially considering how undemocratic EU's legislative procedures can get. Considering the lack of direct democracy in the European Union, exposure and public protest is the only viable way to oppose this legislature. There's also an ongoing petition against the legislature: https://www.openpetition.eu/petition/online/preserve-eprivac...

Hold your horses, put down the pitchforks. You realise the author is a _member of the European Parliament_?? And at least in my corner of EU we vote on who to send to EU parliament. You can vote on whoever you want in the national elections and then vote for the pirate party for the EU seat. Edit: from your comment history I guess you vote far right, which is usually the part of EU pushing hardest for these measures?…

It's still no and far from a direct democracy.

Re: Messaging and chat control

#27

Post by bserge »

czzr wrote: post #7
slickrick216 wrote: post #4

It’s the same people who believe in medical apartheid that are bringing this in. All under the guise of the greater good. Who is it good for because it’s not for the publics. Law enforcement brutality exists online too and all over the world. It’s not simply a US phenomenon. Sickens me that they use children as an excuse. If they really gave a crap about kids there is so much that could be done right now.

Medical apartheid? What’s that referring to?

Well, people of a certain background get treated like shit by the supposedly universal healthcare systems in Europe, so there's that.

Re: Messaging and chat control

#28

Post by loriverkutya »

herbst wrote: post #26
zibzab wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hold your horses, put down the pitchforks. You realise the author is a _member of the European Parliament_?? And at least in my corner of EU we vote on who to send to EU parliament. You can vote on whoever you want in the national elections and then vote for the pirate party for the EU seat. Edit: from your comment history I guess you vote far right, which is usually the part of EU pushing hardest for these measures?…

It's still no and far from a direct democracy.

Can you please be sensible? Direct demoracy is not working with 445 million people.

Re: Messaging and chat control

#29

Post by avsteele »

kleiba wrote: post #6

Privacy is something that people usually only care about on a theoretical level. Practically speaking, they're often happy to not care so much at all if they get something more tangible in return. --- Company: Excuse me, would you mind us profiling you through an accurate survey of most of your everyday purchases? Customer: Heck no! Company: What if we let you collect "points" that will maybe someday safe you a littl…

Yes, users are price sensitive when it comes to selling their privacy. They also have a different sensitivity upon consideration of who the other party is and their perceived/intended use of the data.

To me, this isn't so surprising and is fully consistent with a greater willingness to give personal info to e.g. Amazon than e.g. the government.

Re: Messaging and chat control

#30

Post by the-dude »

petre wrote: post #25
the-dude wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> large public gatherings. In some counties it is much broader than that. Painting it as hyperbole sounds hollow if you are downplaying it yourself.

If the gathering is large enough they can't stop it and will back down. See the yellow vests movement.

That only works for gatherings not associated with a legal entity.

For example a sports club ( football? ) can't ignore the rules or it will be fined / closed.

Post reply on HN