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

EU Commission doesn't understand what's written in its own chat control bill

mullvad.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–219 of 219 posts

Re: EU Commission doesn't understand what's written in its own chat control bill

#211

Post by throwawaylinux »

krimpenrik wrote: post #201
throwawaylinux wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "well educated people on HN" are some of the most meekly subservient to government authority and blind cheerleaders of its power I've ever encountered, and there is a strong scorn and open hatred for lesser "deplorable" classes of society with incorrect opinions who they need government protection from.

It has come to my attention as well that the more higher educated people in my circles are more blind to the power grab that is happening by government here. Topics around housing, energy, immigration, covid, EU policy, nitrogen ect are blindly followed by whatever the authority is saying and without any desire to think for themselves. It has come to the point where debating any of above Topics is impossible and gets…

There certainly seems to be class hatred and division behind it. I don't know if there are any rational elements to it like the higher classes having more to lose, or it is purely driven by propaganda from the ruling class to cement their power.

That people are irrational or willfully ignorant about things is not surprising. People can become irrational and blind to truth through their own self-delusions or through propaganda. Being "educated" or having more money doesn't change that.

Re: EU Commission doesn't understand what's written in its own chat control bill

#213

Post by account42 »

WeylandYutani wrote: post #189
raverbashing wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, the people who lived under the Stasi remember it vividly

And vote AFD or even the neonazis. Democracy is one bad week away from turning into a dictatorship. We've gotten complacent and forgot that fact. Democracy is not the natural state of society.

When the encumbents ignore the populace then populists get elected, yes.

If you don't want people voting for extremist parties then get the more mainstream ones to stop ignoring concerns about the current policies.

Re: EU Commission doesn't understand what's written in its own chat control bill

#214

Post by jll29 »

tablespoon wrote: post #56
jll29 wrote: post #50

Don't believe vendors' lies about "end-to-end" encryption. If caught red handed, they will always say it depends on how you define where both "ends" begin. Do not trust a cloud service that you have not developed and deployed yourself. You may trust untrusted hardware with your encrypted content, but only if you have given it your content pre-encrypted by yourself, not trusted a third party to encrypt it on your beha…

> Don't trust old-school typewriters and the postal system either. Letters are routinely opened and typewriters can be matched. For example, the Stasi (secret police of the former GDR - German "Democratic" Republic) had an archive of type samples of all sold models of typewriters for re-identification of political pamphlets. That's theoretical. I highly doubt anyone extends that much effort to target typewriters anym…

While you are right, note that the typewriters and certificates were just off-the-cuff examples to show that you cannot trust a lot of things any more, certainly not the ¨end-to-end encryption¨ promises but also many other things.

I am not advocating for typewriters as such, but there was the story about India ordering thousands after Snowden's revelations, and I just wanted to say why that is silly. If I want to find out something really badly, I will, so there is no reason to believe that people who have more resources cannot do the same.

Re: EU Commission doesn't understand what's written in its own chat control bill

#215

Post by orwin »

mananaysiempre wrote: post #99
orwin wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It cannot. It can refuse an organized protest, and ask the prefect to deploy the police at particular location, but cannot prohibit protests. Actually, Paris' mayor is the mayor with the less executive power, as they don't have a municipal police. Paris prefect, on the other hand, is the most powerful prefect in France. But prefects in France have too much power. It would be fine if the legislative and judiciary bran…

The prefect was also involved at some point, I might well have mixed that up. The structure honestly seems quite convoluted from the outside, but the responsible party seemed to be a part of the executive. (I tried to check whether a tribunal of some sort belonged to the judiciary, because it looked like it didn’t, and gave up. No deep knowledge here, sorry.) > [The mayor] can refuse an organized protest [...], but c…

Sorry, had other stuff to do hopefully you'll see this message.

In fact, I was wrong, I thought the mayor had some interdiction power, they have none. the mayor cannot 'not allow' a protest, the prefect can. When Paris' mayor is not on the same political side 1s the government, it can lead to weird stuff (like what's happening now).

It is absolutely authoritarian. I think France was ranked as one of the most authoritative democracy, on par with Russia, turkey,a bit less than Egypt.

Those interdiction weren't used offensively until Macron though. You have to limit the area of the interdiction (can't be the whole city) and pre-2017 were easely accessible 48h before they were effective, and could be challenged in court.

In 2018-2019 they tested putting the interdiction up at the last moment, it worked, so now it's even worse, they draft the interdiction as active immediately and put a copy on the prefecture doors, do not make them available on the internet then fine everyone.

The most egregious was one that took effect at 17h but wasn't put on the door until 17h30.

What's funny is that people voted macron 'against fascism' twice, not realizing that his way is a fascism too (in this case, I mean fascism as a catch-all for ideologies coming from Cesarism/Bonapartism, as defined by Krondstadt butcher himself, Trosky, terrible man but accurate critic of his time).

Re: EU Commission doesn't understand what's written in its own chat control bill

#216

Post by Jolter »

mongol wrote: post #181
meling wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I only read the blog summarizing the interviews, but I’m horrified that she can talk this much bs with such apparent confidence. I don’t know who she is and how she got to have this role, which she does not appear qualified to hold.

She is a Swedish politician from the Social Democratic party. One of the senior ones that served as minister in the cabinet for a number of years. Unfortunately, that does not mean she is competent

She is competent in many areas but obviously not in tech.

Re: EU Commission doesn't understand what's written in its own chat control bill

#217

Post by feanaro »

dotancohen wrote: post #104
feanaro wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yet at the same time you always hear people repeat that law isn't code, and it isn't dumb, and the spirit of the law is more important than any loophole. That if you try exploiting a loophole, you will just get caught and shot down. So which is it? And if the wording of the law is meant to prevent loopholes, then this could be accomplished in better ways than writing extremely convoluted sentences over and over again…

PHP got the nullsafe operator in version 8.0, released in 2020. That's two and a half decades of language improvement before this common idiom: $foo = getFoo(); if ( !$foo ) { return null; } $foo = $foo->getBar(); if ( !$foo ) { return null; } return $foo->getBaz(); ...could be replaced with this: return getFoo()?->getBar()?->getBaz(); And that was with a strong committee actually interested in improving the language…

> The side-effects of those qualifiers are untested and unknown,

If you define the qualifiers to be a literal shorthand for the current status quo litany, what side-effects do you envision, other than better readability?

> and the current long legalese serves the people that it is meant to serve.

Does it, though? With the long-winded expensive processes favouring those with capital and punishing those with none into unjust settlements for fear of debilitating costs? With practically requiring expensive lawyers in order to have any hope of navigating the byzantine mazes of modern law?

Re: EU Commission doesn't understand what's written in its own chat control bill

#218

Post by Jolter »

denton-scratch wrote: post #100

I simply can't believe she's as ignorant as she comes across; even if she doesn't know that you can't "scan" an encrypted file, she's a damned EU Commissioner; she has a large staff of educated people to advise her. I think she simply doesn't care about the reality, she wants to bang a "protect the children" drum for political reasons. It's odd; she seems to be a pedagogy graduate, who was once (1988) elected to the…

I’m not sure what you mean by her not being an elected representative. She was a Swedish member of parliament for a long time, not just one term. The tradition in Sweden is that ministers are taken from among the ranks of the ruling party’s MPs, even though exceptions sometimes are made.

Re: EU Commission doesn't understand what's written in its own chat control bill

#219

Post by soundnote »

Xelbair wrote: post #182
watwut wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would point out that Russian system failed entirely and totally when it comes to keeping it "free". Meanwhile, I see French having actual rather big protests all the time. Meanwhile, I see Russia actively exporting authoritarianism with full revert back to bad times. I think that one big reason is that there is practical difference in the two systems ... and that practical difference is favoring the French system.

The issue isn't with CURRENT government. The issue is that with such huge loopholes, FUTURE one might exploit them on a bigger scale than what happens in Russia. And being constantly vigilant and opposed to such laws, is what keeps the society sane and working. The protest in France could be officially banned, but it wouldn't stop the protesters. Whereas current Russia would bring in the army to forcefully stop prote…

It's not just future governments - think about Canada trying to debank the Convoy protesters, etc. People cheered, because stomping on people they don't like feels good.
Post reply on HN