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

European Commission prefers breaking privacy to protecting kids

lightbluetouchpaper.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 199 posts

Re: European Commission prefers breaking privacy to protecting kids

#181

Post by ClumsyPilot »

Dracophoenix wrote: post #133
RC_ITR wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you're a hammer (libertarian) everything looks like a nail (bad faith crisis management to justify to government overreach). The problem is the world is full of crises that need government support, the question is which do we want addressed?

What about in the case where many of these issues are almost always nails regardless of how convoluted or complicated they may look others? Andrew Cuomo falsified and hid information regarding his mismanagement of elder care facilities. Hong Kong has been placed under de facto martial law by the CCP with the goal of crushing dissent. Various governments and government organizations have spied on their citizens throug…

'secret purchases from databrokers.'

Don't you complain about mah free market libertarian data brokers!

Re: European Commission prefers breaking privacy to protecting kids

#182

Post by ClumsyPilot »

eschevarria wrote: post #158
RC_ITR wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait. In what period of human existence did people live longer, have more access to plumbing, or have better literacy? The government caused all those things to go up

Economic growth caused these things to go up; the governments (which also existed in past periods of human existence) caused growth to be much slower than it could have been. Don’t confuse government causing a increase in government spending on something with causing an increase in the actual supply of that thing. When governments restrict the supply of healthcare and housing (which they do, through professional lice…

If you can blame government without any evidecne he can praise governments without any evidence

You seem to not address fraud in the market, like snake oil salesmen, at all

Re: European Commission prefers breaking privacy to protecting kids

#183

Post by ClumsyPilot »

SamPatt wrote: post #134
peoplefromibiza wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> EU and NSA, same actors, different starting conditions that's frankly one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read in my entire life. Care to explain what's your rationale behind it? Where's, for example, the European Snowden? Where's proof of EU spying not only allied leaders, which is already bad enough, but the citizens of the country they work for?

The European Snowden was Snowden. The UK is a part of the Five Eyes and Snowden was stationed in Switzerland while doing mass surveillance.

Five eyes does not include EU: it's almost every western nation except eu!

Re: European Commission prefers breaking privacy to protecting kids

#184

Post by peoplefromibiza »

BlargMcLarg wrote: post #121
peoplefromibiza wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is so 1984 1984 has never been about this. It's about the weaknesses of men, that would gladly change a reduction of the chocolate ration into an increase, because it's their job to lie and alter the past, believing they are doing god's work. Also, in 1984 surveillance is secret, not publicly stated in a formal document visible by everybody. Better examples of 1984 in action: the DDR, the NSA.

"Big Brother" was a pretty big part of 1984, and I definitely have gotten "Big Brother" vibes from the EU these last few years, under the pretense of "we know better than you and we want to protect you". Having a good will doesn't make it okay for the EU to become a helicopter parent, nor do I like the prospect of that good will evaporating and them having access to what is effectively more and more surveillance.

> "Big Brother"

yeah, and what the Big Brother does to you if you don't follow rules is kept secret, by secret police agents, because

1 - the Big Brother doesn't physically exists

2 - people would revolt if they knew what really happens to deviants, so it's imperative they are kept in the dark (“Until they become conscious they will never rebel, and until after they have rebelled they cannot become conscious.” )

“If you want to keep a secret, you must also hide it from yourself.”

So 1984 does not apply at all in this case, because the document is public and everyone can read it and eventually revolt against it

Re: European Commission prefers breaking privacy to protecting kids

#185

Post by raxxorraxor »

unionpivo wrote: post #174
raxxorraxor wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Problem is that if an ID system is ever established and becomes ubiquitous, a quick change in legislature can force online services to leverage the ID. Protection of intellectual property, CSAM, a pretext is easily found. Happens faster than you can blink and than the free internet in Europe would quickly die. The best protection against that is to have alternative ID systems or just anonymous usage if no transaction…

Pretty much whole of EU already has some form of government ID (not sure if there are any exceptions, but if they are they are not many). People are used to them, so it's really just a matter of time, before it goes digital. I don't disagree with your observations, I just think its a forgone conclusion at this point. That said I think the value lies in creating new non centralized (and less popular) solutions. They w…

Yes, sadly even with fingerprints in the newest version which is completely ludicrous and we have it because some countries needed to implement it for domestic self-gratification. There are regional differences but here nobody uses their government ID for online services.

Re: European Commission prefers breaking privacy to protecting kids

#186

Post by peoplefromibiza »

raxxorraxor wrote: post #170
peoplefromibiza wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You have a photo of your child in the bathtub and the police smash down your door. Reminder: Europe is not US. Nobody can smash your door here without proper authorization from a court. And even then, they would knock.

> Nobody can smash your door here without proper authorization from a court. This is an urban legend. My country Germany often prides itself to have protections here but that is a lie. In reality courts are overwhelmed so they basically sign any request the executive brings in. We had that for a twitter comment that hit the news a few month ago, but we also have that for people buying flowerpots online because they w…

> Surveillance is again very strong here.

Now imagine elsewhere.

Anyway: this has nothing to do with what I wrote, which is not an urban legend at all!

Doors have rarely (never AFAIK in my country) been smashed by the police, not even in those cases where there were actual terrorists inside the building.

Because our police forces are not trained to be war soldiers and are not armed to the teeth.

Re: European Commission prefers breaking privacy to protecting kids

#187

Post by peoplefromibiza »

SamPatt wrote: post #134
peoplefromibiza wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> EU and NSA, same actors, different starting conditions that's frankly one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read in my entire life. Care to explain what's your rationale behind it? Where's, for example, the European Snowden? Where's proof of EU spying not only allied leaders, which is already bad enough, but the citizens of the country they work for?

The European Snowden was Snowden. The UK is a part of the Five Eyes and Snowden was stationed in Switzerland while doing mass surveillance.

> The UK is a part of the Five Eyes

UK is not EU

> Snowden was stationed in Switzerland

Switzerland is not EU

Re: European Commission prefers breaking privacy to protecting kids

#188

Post by peoplefromibiza »

martimarkov wrote: post #126
peoplefromibiza wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You have a photo of your child in the bathtub and the police smash down your door. Reminder: Europe is not US. Nobody can smash your door here without proper authorization from a court. And even then, they would knock.

But the OP's sentiment still stands. Repetitional damage, stress, potential job loss, etc. just because you wanted to take a picture of your daughter or son in the bathtub playing with a rubber duck to send to your grandparents. I mean my parents still have those pictures in photo albums and they have been shown multiple times to family friends or relatives - nobody has obvs objected - but there is nobody from a 3rd…

> But the OP's sentiment still stands. Repetitional damage, stress, potential job loss

This has never happened though!

Can you point me to a case in EU where a parent took a photo of their children and got in trouble?

So it's kinda like saying: but OP is right, we should all live underground, because aliens could fire lasers on us!

Re: European Commission prefers breaking privacy to protecting kids

#189

Post by peoplefromibiza »

boppo1 wrote: post #135
thenaturalist wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Care to share some details? When it comes to privacy invasion the EU has been a champion in curbing massively intrusive corporate practices for years now. Some of it is awful yes, but other high visibility projects have been amazing. I'm glad to be European when I look at the insanity that is the American tracking and personal data brokers industry. I recommend a recent John Oliver on this: https://www.youtube.com/wa…

So private entities can't snoop on me, just thee government?

hell yes!

Government is a body of elected people, by the people.

And it's subject to the people's scrutiny!

Re: European Commission prefers breaking privacy to protecting kids

#190

Post by pc86 »

jaywalk wrote: post #72
coldtea wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds good, doesn't work. Security and freedom are "platonic" ideals. None of those exists in the abstract, as a real world thing, and you can't find one without the other in the wild (in a Disney-like world, maybe, but not in the real world, in the presense of others, that is people that want to deprive you of either/both, and can benefit from doing so). Trivially speaking, if some thugs can just come and beat you…

When people say "privacy and freedom are more important than security" it's in regards to privacy and freedom being curtailed by the government in order for the government to provide security. Don't be absurd.

You can't argument that security trumps privacy and/or freedom without being absurd, so it's kind of expected.
Post reply on HN