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

Undermining Democracy: The EU Commission's Controversial Push for Surveillance

dannymekic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 386 posts

Re: Undermining Democracy: The EU Commission's Controversial Push for Surveillance

#221

Post by clubm8 »

masswerk wrote: post #50

> To sway European public opinion, however, the European Commission went even further. X’s Transparency Report shows that the European Commission also used ‘microtargeting’ to ensure that the ads did not appear to people who care about privacy (…) and eurosceptics Independently of the broader privacy and surveillance topic, this is highly concerning: if institutions, like the EC, start to run agendas through and by c…

>Independently of the broader privacy and surveillance topic, this is highly concerning: if institutions, like the EC, start to run agendas through and by carefully created echo chambers and keep certain segments of the demographic out of the loop, all is lost, as there is no common and public realm of political discourse anymore.

It's especially annoying since many people who vote in the EU are a bit more... extreme? Like when you're marketing to "Beligum" or "NL" whatever... the people who've been there multiple generations are the right wing parties.

The folks obeying the spirit of the laws are like the students in America, oft not registered locally.

It's a feedback loop of the same sort who Brexited being sent other things in their feeds.

I agree with the author:

>If there is insufficient support for a proposed legislation, the only proper democratic response is to withdraw it

I'm tired of this fraternity brother model of public policy -- ask until you hear the "yes" you wanted from those who didn't block you from being heard at all.

Re: Undermining Democracy: The EU Commission's Controversial Push for Surveillance

#222

Post by hef19898 »

blibble wrote: post #158
peoplefromibiza wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And no one elected this persons with so much power by the way. this is a very tired meme, they have been nominated and scrutinized by the people elected in what you called probably the best thing that we have in Europe i.e. the EU Parliament edit: elections solve none of the problems people think they solve. proof is governments are corrupt even though they are elected by the people. if the objections is "we can't…

> this is a very tired meme, they have been nominated and scrutinized by the people elected in what you called probably the best thing that we have in Europe i.e. the EU Parliament yes, in 2019 the Parliament were allowed to pick from a list of exactly one person (selected by another part of the EU)

Said other part being the elected heada of states / government of each member nation.

Re: Undermining Democracy: The EU Commission's Controversial Push for Surveillance

#223

Post by scott_w »

bondarchuk wrote: post #192
scott_w wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EU does not set freedom of speech laws beyond requiring signatory nations protect a weaker freedom of expression. Any nation can have stronger free speech protections if it chooses to and the EU bodies can’t prevent it. Your argument is nonsense.

The proposal in question does regulate freedom of expression, as the gp said, because it proposes monitoring all communications of citizens. So their argument is not nonsense at all.

It’s nonsense because that’s not what the proposal is. It’s focused on CSAM. It’s a bad law but what you and GP are saying is pure tinfoil-hat-level nonsense.

Re: Undermining Democracy: The EU Commission's Controversial Push for Surveillance

#224

Post by mcpackieh »

stevarino wrote: post #162
dsign wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder what would happen if there were not politicians, if the parliament of Europe were the sum of all its citizens voting for laws in some sort of mega-stack-overflow consensus system. A part of me wants to believe this madness would end. Another part fears that we would try, at least for a few months, total surveillance and bisections as a form of capital punishment. But on the bright side, we would be able to c…

California Prop 22 comes to mind, unfortunately: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_California_Proposition_... There was so much uncertainty around it and who wanted what that a lot of people voted against their best interests. I'm still meeting people who thought they were voting against Uber and Lyft with that proposition. The ads were constant and incredibly misleading. And that was one issue. Every time these p…

Prop 22 was contrary to the interests of professional drivers, but probably in line with the interests of riders who benefit from drivers being exploited. When push comes to shove, a whole lot of people choose cheap service over their publicly espoused principles.

For evidence of this, consider how many suburban boomers are eager to hire illegal immigrants to do lawn work around their McMansion for less than minimum wage. Most would probably tell you that minimum wage laws are good or that illegal immigrants should be deported (one or the other, depending on what side of the aisle they're on...) but when push comes to shove they both choose the lowest bidding contractor to do their yardwork. After all, they aren't yard-workers, just like most Californians aren't uber drivers.

Re: Undermining Democracy: The EU Commission's Controversial Push for Surveillance

#225

Post by clubm8 »

greatgib wrote: post #61

The European parlement is probably the best thing that we have in Europe, most good things and new rights come from there. At the opposite, the European Commission is probably the worse that we can have. It is totally corrupted (see the vice president with bags of cash given by the Qatar and co) or at least morally corrupted by lobbies. And no one elected this persons with so much power by the way. Good things to won…

>the European Commission is probably the worse that we can have. It is totally corrupted (see the vice president with bags of cash given by the Qatar and co) or at least morally corrupted by lobbies.

Euroskepticism is a virus, but OTOH the Five Stars had a good idea: politics should not be a profession.

I'd love to see more folks do good work then pivot to entertainment if they want bags of Qatari cash in a way that doesn't involve destabilization

Re: Undermining Democracy: The EU Commission's Controversial Push for Surveillance

#226

Post by scott_w »

bondarchuk wrote: post #199
scott_w wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a nonsense slippery slope argument. Voting systems are entirely for individual nations to determine, not the EU.

No, the point is that a system of total surveillance, as proposed here by the EU, could be used by the EU to influence voting behaviour regardless of any individual voting systems. E.g. someone whatsapps their mom "I'm gonna vote for the anti-EU party", subsequently their secret "not a pedophile" score gets adjusted and next thing you know they can't get a mortgage anymore.

The law is bad but spouting off incorrect nonsense like this only makes you look unhinged. Everything you said is just completely made up.

Re: Undermining Democracy: The EU Commission's Controversial Push for Surveillance

#228

Post by layer8 »

t0bia_s wrote: post #165
layer8 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What alternative do you propose? The politicians are elected representatives of and by the people.

Eurpean Commison is not elected by citizens of EU. They are nominated by the European Council and confirmed by the European Parliament. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Commission Similar system is for WHO. They are not elected organisations, yet shape our laws. This bother quite a lot of people and don't bring a trust in system.

> European Commison is not elected by citizens of EU.

The European Parliament who approves the laws is directly elected. And as noted by sibling, the Commission indirectly also is.

Re: Undermining Democracy: The EU Commission's Controversial Push for Surveillance

#229

Post by scott_w »

blibble wrote: post #169
scott_w wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh man, I’m so glad my country (the U.K.) left the E.U. and no longer have to worry about all that government corrupti- oh…

there's a major difference with the EU system is is not possible for the parliament to modify or remove previously passed legislation, once you have a bad law it's essentially permanent this is not true of the UK system (see what happened to the Identity Cards Act 2006)

That’s total gibberish. It’s not easy but it’s absolutely possible to amend EU legislation. It works in exactly the same way as the UK: by enacting new legislation.

Re: Undermining Democracy: The EU Commission's Controversial Push for Surveillance

#230

Post by [deleted] »

masswerk wrote: post #50

> To sway European public opinion, however, the European Commission went even further. X’s Transparency Report shows that the European Commission also used ‘microtargeting’ to ensure that the ads did not appear to people who care about privacy (…) and eurosceptics Independently of the broader privacy and surveillance topic, this is highly concerning: if institutions, like the EC, start to run agendas through and by c…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN