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

Telegram abides by EU laws, including the Digital Services Act

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 143 posts

Re: Telegram abides by EU laws, including the Digital Services Act

#21

Post by jMyles »

At some point, the adults in the room (and specifically, a few brave and seasoned elder statesmen/women) need to stand up and state the obvious:

On sufficiently long time scales, the internet will not tolerate states, and states will not be able to withstand the influence of the internet.

The ability to copy and send bytes around the world, to capture and disseminate media in such a way that forces transparency, but also to facilitate and democratize private conversation, to route around censorship... these are qualities that make what are today fundamental aspects of statecraft, such as state secrets, intellectual property, control over money supply and trade, surveillance, and censorship, impossible.

It's time to acknowledge that we need to transition our methods for ensuring each other's safety, well-being, freedom, justice, and prosperity via stateless channels and stop regarding states as having any jurisdiction over the internet.

Re: Telegram abides by EU laws, including the Digital Services Act

#22

Post by spwa4 »

amelius wrote: post #6
ronsor wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook is also full of drug and malware shops and advertisements for such.

Does that justify it then?

It shows what the EU action is about. It's not about telegram's supposed crimes, whatever you think they are, because other platforms are full of the same crimes.

The difference is that other platforms give EU states access to people's private messages. If you go into the technicalities of what EXACTLY this means, it started with a list of 27 organizations that got blanket access, without judicial oversight (because all of the different rules from the member states apply. Some do not require judicial oversight). Organized long ago by Interpol. It grew from there, exactly as people expected.

Oh and in case you're wondering. This already exists. It is NOT about the new EU directive ("directive 92"). This is about delivering specific individual's messages, when specifically asked to, and maybe blocking them.

Re: Telegram abides by EU laws, including the Digital Services Act

#23

Post by mgaunard »

jMyles wrote: post #21

At some point, the adults in the room (and specifically, a few brave and seasoned elder statesmen/women) need to stand up and state the obvious: On sufficiently long time scales, the internet will not tolerate states, and states will not be able to withstand the influence of the internet. The ability to copy and send bytes around the world, to capture and disseminate media in such a way that forces transparency, but…

Sounds like anti-statist propaganda.

Re: Telegram abides by EU laws, including the Digital Services Act

#24

Post by mtlmtlmtlmtl »

threeseed wrote: post #5
ronsor wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook is also full of drug and malware shops and advertisements for such.

Meta will take down those ads if reported. What is important when it comes to regulators is not whether you fail to comply or not. It is whether you take your responsibility to comply seriously e.g. timely responses to information requests, continuous process improvement etc.

I regularly report scam ads as well as obvious catfishing friend requests from obviously fake accounts whose only post is a sketchy URL to some "sex chat". Almost all of the reports are rejected.

It seems obvious to me that Meta's moderation is mostly about pretending just enough for regulators to go away, and no more. Hell, Meta probably indirectly makes money from these scams by targeting more scams at the people who fall for them, at a premium. Meta makes money, scammers make money, regulators are content. It's a win-win-win.

Re: Telegram abides by EU laws, including the Digital Services Act

#27

Post by tpm »

spwa4 wrote: post #22
amelius wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does that justify it then?

It shows what the EU action is about. It's not about telegram's supposed crimes, whatever you think they are, because other platforms are full of the same crimes. The difference is that other platforms give EU states access to people's private messages. If you go into the technicalities of what EXACTLY this means, it started with a list of 27 organizations that got blanket access, without judicial oversight (because…

Which EU action? France which arrested Durov is not the EU. The EU can't arrest anyone, only the member states can. Durov was not arrested because of the EU DSA.

Re: Telegram abides by EU laws, including the Digital Services Act

#28

Post by wmf »

jMyles wrote: post #21

At some point, the adults in the room (and specifically, a few brave and seasoned elder statesmen/women) need to stand up and state the obvious: On sufficiently long time scales, the internet will not tolerate states, and states will not be able to withstand the influence of the internet. The ability to copy and send bytes around the world, to capture and disseminate media in such a way that forces transparency, but…

Basically Barlow's Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace from the 1990s. I think history has shown it to be more wrong than right.

Re: Telegram abides by EU laws, including the Digital Services Act

#29

Post by greenthrow »

jMyles wrote: post #21

At some point, the adults in the room (and specifically, a few brave and seasoned elder statesmen/women) need to stand up and state the obvious: On sufficiently long time scales, the internet will not tolerate states, and states will not be able to withstand the influence of the internet. The ability to copy and send bytes around the world, to capture and disseminate media in such a way that forces transparency, but…

You are delusional my dude. Servers and routers exist in meatspace. The meatspace laws win out.

Re: Telegram abides by EU laws, including the Digital Services Act

#30

Post by peoplefromibiza »

jMyles wrote: post #21

At some point, the adults in the room (and specifically, a few brave and seasoned elder statesmen/women) need to stand up and state the obvious: On sufficiently long time scales, the internet will not tolerate states, and states will not be able to withstand the influence of the internet. The ability to copy and send bytes around the world, to capture and disseminate media in such a way that forces transparency, but…

the only problem in your manifesto is that no internet can exist without connectivity.

He who controls the cables controls the (cyber)universe

Post reply on HN