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

The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies

mullvad.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 425 posts

Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies

#341

Post by dylan604 »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #303
CuriouslyC wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This would be delightful. Being a politician should be a curse that the dedicated bear for the good of humanity, not cushy job and badge of pride.

> being a politician should be a curse that the dedicated bear for the good of humanity, not cushy job and badge of pride Nobody I know would run for state office. They pay poorly. You have to work in the state capitol, which in most state's is awful. You lose your privacy. And for what, a marginal legislative role? The historic benefit was pride. But with nihilism in vogue and trust in government low, that reward is…

>Our intelligent and ambitious don't aim for public office. (It even feels trite to call it public service.)

No, they become lobbyists instead. They have more power as they are the ones controlling the elected officials.

>That's a problem.

Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies

#342

Post by mdp2021 »

titzer wrote: post #266

The actual proposal, first paragraph: > The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) and Article 24(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’) 1 enshrine as rights the protection and care of children’s best interests and well-being. In 2021, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child underlined that these rights must be equally protected in the digit…

"For the children", let us make them grow up in a world of lunacy, /S

Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies

#343

Post by lordnacho »

taink wrote: post #319
lordnacho wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that is a perceptions index. People are going to answer based on what they heard about the previous year's index. Of course it's hard to find the "actual corruption" figures, but that doesn't mean the perceptions index is of any value.

This is the best authoritative source that I could find. The few assertions I've seen that Singapore is less corrupt than most european and north american countries quote Transparency International as a source, so I assume it might be an acceptable one. They also supplement their findings with a "GCB" survey[1] (which is less recent), and given enough time I guess there are other sources one could find. These are sur…

Yeah it's not entirely crazy when you are talking about something to quote whatever you can find.

But on this particular index, I strongly suspect it is simply continuing existing biases. It's the thing people quote and by quoting it you get reinforce next year's rankings. Plus it's the kind of thing nobody can ever verify due to its nature.

Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies

#345

Post by moffkalast »

neuronic wrote: post #340
moffkalast wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because of the person who's currently the president of the Commission, that's why. Ask any German about von der Leyen.

German here, that name triggers PTSD. Merkel removed this clowness from domestic politics by surprise-inserting her in the European Commission. Merkel simply removed a political opponent from German domestic relevance and the rest of Europe has to suffer for it. I am sorry. There is mostly vile hate and vitriol for her in the entire country. Her entire career was a show of the Peter Principle.

Well for what it's worth it's usually the reverse. Local politicians get rid of good people by sending them to the EU, so the EU parliament on average consists of better people than local governments. Consequently it's also why so few proposals from the current commission ever pass I suppose.

Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies

#347

Post by TeeMassive »

stametseater wrote: post #338
JasonFruit wrote: post #331

A minor-seeming terminology quibble that has far-reaching effects: the chat control proposal does not belong in human society. People in democratic societies don't have different rights than those under other political systems; everyone has a right to speak freely and expect privacy in their communications, absent very specific situations where there is evidence that what is being discussed is unallowably dangerous t…

Natural rights are a kind of theology. There's no scientific evidence for their existence, they're just asserted to exist. The fact that such rights are not recognized in most countries means that for practical intents and purposes, they do not exist in those countries.

All rights are natural. Then restrictions are made to limit them.

Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies

#348

Post by giraffe_lady »

stametseater wrote: post #338
JasonFruit wrote: post #331

A minor-seeming terminology quibble that has far-reaching effects: the chat control proposal does not belong in human society. People in democratic societies don't have different rights than those under other political systems; everyone has a right to speak freely and expect privacy in their communications, absent very specific situations where there is evidence that what is being discussed is unallowably dangerous t…

Natural rights are a kind of theology. There's no scientific evidence for their existence, they're just asserted to exist. The fact that such rights are not recognized in most countries means that for practical intents and purposes, they do not exist in those countries.

If true then natural rights are an excellent example that things can exist without scientific evidence of them. Theology it may be it's a more powerful and useful concept than the one you're proposing.

Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies

#349

Post by EGreg »

photochemsyn wrote: post #30

Suggested alternative: The "End Political Corruption Proposal" "Given that political corruption is rife in European countries, with great detriments to the healthy function of government, all politicians in positions where they may be engaging in corrupt behavior must submit to 24-7 audio and video surveillance, which will be piped over public platforms for crowdsourcing of corruption detection. All personal communic…

If all meeting by public officials on duty were recorded (as police officer bodycams now are) then we would avoid tons of wars and geopolitical conflicts. We’d realize these guys are bozos who didn’t actually even understand each other and should be replaced by diligent teams who have to develop better frameworks. THESE POLITICIANS OWE US THE PEOPLE to do this IN ALL COUNTRIES. Instead of shaming us into supporting their “unprovoked and unjustified” wars.

Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies

#350

Post by EGreg »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #303
CuriouslyC wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This would be delightful. Being a politician should be a curse that the dedicated bear for the good of humanity, not cushy job and badge of pride.

> being a politician should be a curse that the dedicated bear for the good of humanity, not cushy job and badge of pride Nobody I know would run for state office. They pay poorly. You have to work in the state capitol, which in most state's is awful. You lose your privacy. And for what, a marginal legislative role? The historic benefit was pride. But with nihilism in vogue and trust in government low, that reward is…

Then perhaps the job shouldn’t be done by individuals, but by groups developing systems.
Post reply on HN