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

The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

netzpolitik.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 443 posts

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#421

Post by slater »

rob_c wrote: post #420
n4r9 wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This person was questioning its efffectiveness simply because more people in hospital were vaccinated than weren't. Without considering the base rate. A sufficiently high base rate would lead to this situation even if the vaccine was 99.9% effective. To address your other point, I believe studies have shown a significant reduction in hospitalisation for young adults who take the vaccine, e.g. https://www.thelancet.co…

> A sufficiently high base rate would lead to this situation even if the vaccine was 99.9% effective. In principle for these factors alone statistically yes, in reality we know this isn't the case. Calling it a vaccine is calling it broken. Calling it a preventative treatment to improve your outcome is more accurate. The studies showing reduced admissions are either grasping at statistical straws or a reglorofied sta…

> unfortunately the particular group all vote a certain way so...

Please stop viewing everything through the political hammer of one ideology over another

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#422

Post by polaco »

yccs27 wrote: post #285
freeflight wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is why google street view sucks in Germany. Street view in Germany sucks because very rarely there will be a pixelated building front?

Street view in Germany sucks because Google didn't want to deal with so many pixelation requests, so they drastically reduced the coverage.

Incidentally, Apple just launched Apple Maps Look Around in Germany this summer. It has very good coverage, but you need an Apple device to access it (ugh).

Interestingly, I haven't seen any public discussion on it.

Apple also allows you to demand blurring of your house, but they do this globally.

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#423

Post by KevinOhHeaven »

denton-scratch wrote: post #370
KevinOhHeaven wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're perhaps in a sociopolitical bubble if you find that claim wild. Even if you don't personally know anyone with this perspective, I would hope that it's logical, rational, and expected that a significant proportion of an indigenous population targeted for "diversification" would be opposed to the idea. (As a counter-anecdote, I don't personally know a single person in my social circle, in Australia, who is suppo…

I'm curious which population in Australia you are designating as "indigenous". Here in the UK, "indigenous" usually means white. But I think of indigenous Australians as the aboriginals. So there's history in Australia of white immigrants trying to force aboriginals to "integrate" with whites. I suppose you could call that "targeted diversification". But you make it sound as if your social circle is white people, obj…

No post body was provided.

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#424

Post by n4r9 »

rob_c wrote: post #420
n4r9 wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This person was questioning its efffectiveness simply because more people in hospital were vaccinated than weren't. Without considering the base rate. A sufficiently high base rate would lead to this situation even if the vaccine was 99.9% effective. To address your other point, I believe studies have shown a significant reduction in hospitalisation for young adults who take the vaccine, e.g. https://www.thelancet.co…

> A sufficiently high base rate would lead to this situation even if the vaccine was 99.9% effective. In principle for these factors alone statistically yes, in reality we know this isn't the case. Calling it a vaccine is calling it broken. Calling it a preventative treatment to improve your outcome is more accurate. The studies showing reduced admissions are either grasping at statistical straws or a reglorofied sta…

> The studies showing reduced admissions are either grasping at statistical straws or a reglorofied statement of "This is a novel contagion in a herd without immunity at which some unknown percentage may be clinically at risk from genetic or environmental factors."

So... the vaccine reduces hospital admissions for young adults because some unknown percentage of them are "at risk" due to (unknown?) factors?

This argument reminds me of Greek astronomers inventing epicycles to fit the model to the data!

Are you referring to Vitamin D supplementation? Would be interesting to see a similar study which factors this out.

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#425

Post by em-bee »

easytiger wrote: post #416
em-bee wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it's a band-aid to a different, more serious problem. you both would have a point if the crime rate in germany or austria was higher due to not allowing surveillance in public spaces. but thankfully they have other deterrents to crime that allow everyone to have more privacy in public spaces.

> germany or austria was higher due to not allowing surveillance in public spaces. Have you seen how many stabbings have been happening in germany lately?

i saw the headlines. i haven't read about any ideas what would be the cause. but whatever it is, surveillance of public space is not going to solve it.

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#426

Post by immibis »

rjzzleep wrote: post #248
imtringued wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Greens in Germany are basically a more serious/realistic Pirate party when the topic is related to the internet. Honestly I vote Greens because of that alone. The fact that the rest of their program is sane is a cherry on top.

Oh my god, not at all. The Greens, are more ideologically driven than any other party and not in a good way(and that ideology does not line up with their campaign promises at all). They have been the single most destructive force in German politics and they have not kept a single campaign promise. This is the supposed "Green" party that campaigned on anti-war and not sending weapons to war zones and closing coal that…

So, in other words... they react to changing circumstances (the exact opposite of ideological)?

Coal used to be worse than gas, so they wanted less coal and more gas, but now the gas is worse, so they want less gas and more coal?

They were opposed to arming Germany out of fear Germany could be tempted to attack other nations, but now that it wasn't Germany who started the attack, they want Germany to help defend?

This is the exact opposite of ideologically driven and it is exactly how every party and politician should be.

If your position is to be against war, even when a tyrannical dictator sends his army to murder your people, that is a stupid position. If you position is to be against war unless it's against the army a tyrannical dictator sent to murder your people, that is a very sensible position.

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#427

Post by mantas »

benhurmarcel wrote: post #161
hnhg wrote: post #41

I have such a strong reaction to news like this, it's hard for me to not think that it's appropriate for every member state to consider leaving the EU now. They've succeeded in shifting me to a very anti-EU stance in one proposed measure - brilliant! It wouldn't surprise me if the leaders of most states are quite keen on such surveillance though.

The EU commission members are appointed by each member state.

The schema how they're appointed and which country appoints which is.. muddy to say the least.

And then EC bureaucracy has a lot of weight with appointed commissioners (who frequently know jackshit about assigned fields) acting as PR figures.

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#428

Post by immibis »

MonkeyMalarky wrote: post #202
altacc wrote: post #5

Due to the volume of messages and the endless need to maximise profits, companies will accept 10% flagged content may be false positives but act against all 100% of flagged content, meaning that the default will be innocent people having action taken against them but with no real recourse to clear their name. I also didn't find anything in there about expectations for reducing numbers of false negatives (where automa…

Doesn't the system eat itself in the end? False flag 10%, remove those users, falsely flag some more, remove them, and so on until all that's left are people who don't use it or just send pictures of their food?

Depends on the absolute rate of false positives.

I, for example, am currently banned from Reddit, after something like 8 years of usage, due to writing a comment mentioning that Reddit administration was corrupt (how's that for irony? I fear the far-right may have been correct about Reddit administration).

In this case it is not a broken system but an actively malicious one but the point still stands: if it takes 8 years to get falsely banned, they still have plenty of active users at any given time, even high-value ones.

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#429

Post by immibis »

pushkine wrote: post #363
mayoi wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You cannot. If you need proof to convince you, really look into any revolution that ever happened in human history. It was always the If nothing more, there's a few words for people who are aware of this and actually do something about it, you can read all about them by looking up news articles containing words like "Terrorist", "Public enemy", "Anarchist". In some cases it is thinly veiled in unrelated words like "N…

There's actually a way (though it won't happen). Setting up a system that invades privacy to catch crimes is bad because once you have that system, all you need is for your government to criminalize good things to reach a dystopia. In order to avoid that, you'd have to actually run that dystopia, but dramatically and at a small scale. A great example could be a US state where abortion is illegal and gives actual jail…

A society where good things are criminalized is already dystopian by definition. Automation is irrelevant.

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#430

Post by immibis »

mantas wrote: post #73
uvesten wrote: post #48

How many EU beaureaucrats got their training in East Germany, I wonder? Or is it rather that they are too young and do not know about/remember what constant surveillance does to trust in a society?

Rather a lot of them were young and naive left-wing supporters who looked at USSR through rose glasses. Wouldn't you want to be bureaucrat in late USSR? No threat of purges above you, only endless opportunity to play with your minions as you see fit.

Believe it or not, the late USSR bureaucracy was anything but left-wing. It only held onto the name through inertia, greatly muddying the definitions of left- and right-wing.

I believe the most accurate description is that left-wing are ideas emphasizing equality and right-wing are ideas emphasizing hierarchy/inequality.

On the extreme end one way you have anarchist ideals (everyone is equal because everyone has full ability to do everything they want) but you also have some failed states (everyone is equal because everyone ekes out a miserable existence). On the other end you have, well, Hitler, dictatorships, and yes, literal bureaucracy, which is just a dictatorship hierarchy by another name.

Post reply on HN