191–200 of 276 posts
France should have listened to GNU/Stallman: You can't have an antifeature in free software. If you try, someone is just going to comment it out.
It's like cars - you can driver faster than the speed limit, but if you get caught doing so, you may be punished.
The French government's approach to modern tech is similar to the UK and Germany in some ways. They seem to be advised by a bunch of decrepit dudes who stopped learning about computers before the OSI model was created.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's the antiAmericanism and the big tech boogeyman that drives a lot of these crazy European attacks on the open web.
...as if the US doesn't do the same every few years: SOPA, PIPA, CISPA, FOSTA-SESTA, KOSA
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My government (UK) seems to struggle with communicating some things with citizens. There is no way so send a simple short message to every citizen. For example, recently the law changed so that pedestrians had priority at 't' road junctions without traffic lights. Ideally, every citizen would be send a small infographic showing the new law on the day it became law. They would click "okay" and go on with their day. In…
> There is no way so send a simple short message to every citizen. 1. Not every citizen possesses an SMS-capable device. 2. Many smartphone-enabled citizens don't want to be nagged by the government. > Instead, the government bought up TV ads and billboards across the country I don't watch TV ads. I haven't seen any of these billboards. And I didn't know there was anything unusual about the law on T-junctions in part…
Article from Le Monde: https://www.lemonde.fr/pixels/article/2023/07/06/le-senat-vo... https://archive.li/krUfW > To prevent multiple attempts at scams by e-mail or SMS, the bill must also allow the establishment of a free "anti-scam filter" sending a warning message to anyone who is about to to go to a site identified as malicious.
How do they expect to enforce this? Especially against open-source browsers, or companies without a presence in France? One disadvantage of globalization is that you get to see the dumb ideas of all politicians. Somehow, the good ideas don't cumulate the same way...
> How do they expect to enforce this? Especially against open-source browsers, or companies without a presence in France? I don't have an answer to your question, but China seems to be successful with the internet censorship thing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So what? So it Chromium but that doesn't stop Google from pushing whatever anti-consumer nonsense they want.
...and you can get Chromium without Google, easily, because it's open source. https://github.com/ungoogled-software/ungoogled-chromium
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Rules exist to require messages be shown on phones - for example the emergency alert system for hurricanes. Doesn't seem unreasonable that computer OS's and/or web browsers be required to support the same.
I think one issue is that unlike physical objects like phones, software doesn't occupy physical space or respect national borders. So trying to enforce "all software of such and such category within our physical borders must have this property" is impractical without draconian measures that pose a significant threat to software freedom. It creates legal hazards to otherwise perfectly benign actions like downloading o…
Things get way harder when you're talking about forcing the addition of user hostile features (like the bill described in the OP presumably is; blocking users from accessing a website that they want to access), because that creates a situation where vendors have to treat the device owner as a potentially hostile actor. I don't see any way you could enforce that without completely destroying users' freedom to run software of their choosing on their own device, no matter how the law is worded, and I wouldn't consider that "reasonable" under any circumstances.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is, until it isn't, and you don't want to put trust in the hands of a bunch of 70 y-o politicians to handle this.
It just is, the law specifies exactly under which law articles websites can be blocked, and all of said articles are quite specific about scamming, phishing, extortion of personal data, etc
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "The people know it." Why do I have strong vibes that a better way of phrasing this is " a percentage of the people who thinks the fr gov's been acting against national interest (likely the people who think /their/ interest aligns with the national interest quite closely) knows it." I mean, I don't know France and I'm no friend with "the government" and I oppose turning browsers into anything they are not supposed…
> I don't know France Then don't try to put discredit to the saying of an insider. GP is 100% right. I've been back after about ~5 years living abroad and the country is in an astonishing decline on every plan (educational, moral, economical, political, diplomatic, security, judicial, medical, etc. the list goes one). And most of it is stemming from the policies enforced in the last decades.