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

161–170 of 336 posts

Re: Messaging and chat control

#161

Post by mkl95 »

lucb1e wrote: post #157
mkl95 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe porn involving 16 year olds is still legal in the Netherlands. Which doesn't mean it is being commercially produced anymore, for obvious reasons. Maybe a Dutch reader can provide more insight into this.

Okay enough opinions, let's look this up. Wikipedia cites the law saying it's 18 https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinderpornografie#Wetgeving_in... It even includes people that "appear to be under 18" even if they turn out not to be. ("[...] afbeelding – van een seksuele gedraging, waarbij iemand die kennelijk de leeftijd van achttien jaar nog niet heeft bereikt, is betrokken of schijnbaar is betrokken, [...]") What I a…

Same thing as in my country then. It seems to be the norm in most if not all of the EU these days.

Re: Messaging and chat control

#162

Post by thegrimmest »

kleiba wrote: post #142
WhyNotHugo wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a difference between me _opt-in_ to give private data in exchange for points, and that being unilaterally imposed. It's also kind of harder to abuse information on my shopping list, whereas there's plenty of ways to abuse having total and complete access to all communication between private parties.

Think of it this way: what is more important to you, the convenience of exchanging text messages with your friends, or keeping these conversations private?

This wasn't always a choice. Before electronic communication people exchanged letters sometimes very frequently (mail service in London peaked at 12x/day). The privacy of these letters was however protected by law, with a warrant being required for police to open and read them.

I don't quite see why our packets and devices shouldn't have the same protections.

Re: Messaging and chat control

#163

Post by thegrimmest »

richardwhiuk wrote: post #63
jokethrowaway wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's fine. My privacy has a price and I'm happy to sell it when I think it's convenient for me. What's happening here is that a state actor is forcing providers to let the state spy on me. That's an authoritarian policy which I strongly oppose.

How much of a rebate on your taxes would you be happy selling it for? What about a discount on your purchases, which was funded by the government, who would then buy the data?

The important question is: do you have a choice? Is your consent requested or respected?

Re: Messaging and chat control

#164

Post by thegrimmest »

MauranKilom wrote: post #151
hhlbf wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So if they want to be xenophobic, what's the problem? It's their country and they can do whatever they want with it.

"So if they want to kill all the Jews, what's the problem? It's their country and they can do whatever they want with it." Creating laws based on popularity makes populism rule. Hence why democracy usually has an explicit legislative branch abstracting over individual sentiments. That helps prevent policy from being devised through an overly greedy algorithm. That is not to say it prevents all these problems. But it…

Well, the difference is that you're within your rights when you vote on whom to admit to your house/town/country. You're not within your rights to round up people already there and gas them. Let's not compare the two.

Re: Messaging and chat control

#166

Post by marton78 »

jokethrowaway wrote: post #139
cm2187 wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is astonishing that most liberal democracies are looking at the Chinese system of control on society with envy. In a way, mandatory covid passes to do anything are already a form of social credit system. And with so many people obsessed with virtu signalling, an actual social credit system would likely get some traction.

[flagged]

This has absolutely nothing to do with socialism.

Re: Messaging and chat control

#167

Post by ekianjo »

toxik wrote: post #111
ekianjo wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So as long as some KPIs are positive, let's ignore the loss of fundamental freedoms?

"Some KPIs are positive"? I had no idea HN was this backwards. More people have moved out of poverty than ever before. Quality of life is improving in so many places, just not around /you/. Amazingly cynical point of view.

> More people have moved out of poverty than ever before.

Erm, you are answering with this argument to the wrong person. I am the first person to point out this kind of things.

This does not mean you can ignore the erosion of civil liberties.

Re: Messaging and chat control

#168

Post by dTal »

effie wrote: post #124
dTal wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alright, let me spell it out. You contend that "submitting your country[sic] laws to legislation from Brusel[sic] was a fatal error", on the grounds of a single piece of legislation. The same argument can be used to argue against any sort of government, since it's a rare government that makes no mistakes at all. The EU is top-tier in a wide range of areas spanning from human rights to food safety. So I ask again - wh…

> on the grounds of a single piece of legislation. No, I said "when you realize", not that it is the "single piece of legislation". There are many other reasons for that stance, such as the fact that nation's people can influence and check their government's laws with more success than it can do that to a supernational undemocratic bureaucratic organization. > The EU is top-tier in a wide range of areas spanning from…

>almost all EU governments act in direct violation and EU has no real power/wish to stop them.

This would seem to contradict your original post, no?

Re: Messaging and chat control

#169

Post by mikeyjk »

thefr0g wrote: post #125
AtticHacker wrote: post #52

If it becomes mandatory for email providers to screen emails, will services such as Protonmail become illegal in the EU? Since they don't have access to their users' email content because of encryption.

> If it becomes mandatory for email providers to screen emails, will services such as Protonmail become illegal in the EU? Protonmail should already be illegal in the EU because they operate under swiss mass-surveilance laws and cooperate with US-American law enforcement. Both of which violates the GDPR if they do business in an EU state. > Since they don't have access to their users' email content because of encrypt…

> Protonmail should already be illegal in the EU because they operate under swiss mass-surveilance laws and cooperate with US-American law enforcement.

:O Seriously? Wow, off to research this I go... That's really disappointing as a paying user. I can't believe I wasn't across this.

Re: Messaging and chat control

#170

Post by andreime »

bartread wrote: post #133

I voted Remain in the EU referendum here in the UK but, in 2021, a few things have happened that have caused me to question whether that was the right choice and whether, with Brexit, we have the right outcome (albeit for very much the wrong reasons seen through 2016 eyes): 1. Ursula von der Leyen and the EU Commission bullying companies and non-EU countries about vaccine production and provision. A wider point here…

m8, to me it seemed like all the news I read in the last years, about England and the road to surveillance state, put your country ahead. I'm sure Boris will soon announce they'll do the same.
Post reply on HN