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

EU Parliamentary Research Service calls VPNs "a loophole that needs closing"

cyberinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 467 posts

Re: EU Parliamentary Research Service calls VPNs "a loophole that needs closing"

#271

Post by kennykartman »

If any EU government people are reading this, I'd like to send you a short message:

Please stop thinking about the kids on the internet. But here's a brief list of things you must work on with higher urgency:

- taxing more large corporations,

- taxing more ultra-rich people,

- funding EU-made (open source) tech and infrastructure,

- let parents spend more time with their kids so they can actually protect their offspring and keep them safe from predators, more than any stupid law you think you can devise can do,

- more trains.

Re: EU Parliamentary Research Service calls VPNs "a loophole that needs closing"

#272

Post by multjoy »

abc123abc123 wrote: post #263
port11 wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oops, someone forgot languages evolve! Otherwise you must use Turkye, one of the Middle English spellings. The United Nations agreed to their request, it’s a minor thing to let people spell it the way that was requested. You don’t have to, but others can. Languages evolve.

[flagged]

Oops, someone forgot to not be a bellend in public.

Re: EU Parliamentary Research Service calls VPNs "a loophole that needs closing"

#273

Post by immibis2 »

rdm_blackhole wrote: post #174
immibis2 wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Talking continually about politics is against the HN guidelines.

Politics and tech are basically intertwined at this point. Tech is also intertwined with Geo-politics, tax policies, mental health, and a bunch of other issues. One cannot talk about tech without talking inevitably of the second or third order effects that derive from it which is again almost inevitably linked to politics either in the US or elsewhere.

Despite that fact, it's against HN guidelines to talk about it. You can read between the lines of this.

Re: EU Parliamentary Research Service calls VPNs "a loophole that needs closing"

#274

Post by defrost »

immibis2 wrote: post #273
rdm_blackhole wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Politics and tech are basically intertwined at this point. Tech is also intertwined with Geo-politics, tax policies, mental health, and a bunch of other issues. One cannot talk about tech without talking inevitably of the second or third order effects that derive from it which is again almost inevitably linked to politics either in the US or elsewhere.

Despite that fact, it's against HN guidelines to talk about it. You can read between the lines of this.

It's against HN guidelines to descend into rabid partisan reflexive unthinking back and forth noise.

If you can curiously converse about politics while avoiding that, you're golden.

Admittedly that's a stretch for a good many.

Re: EU Parliamentary Research Service calls VPNs "a loophole that needs closing"

#275

Post by lemoncookiechip »

nirui wrote: post #109

In case people no longer remember, when China started to require websites to register for a license before be allowed to operate, it was for "protecting the children" too. This simple policy then goes on to silence most individual publisher(/self-media) and consolidated the industry into the hands of the few, with no opportunity left for smaller entrepreneurs. This is arguably much worse than allowing children to wat…

You know, if Politicians, Law Enforcement and Military Personnel are included and affected by all these anti-privacy laws, I'm all for it (not really). Let their daily corruption come to light by the opposition exposing all their dirty laundry (because of course they'd used the data against each other) and vice-versa over and over... and that's not gonna happen because we don't live in that world where laws apply fairly to everyone.

"Rules for thee but not for me."

Re: EU Parliamentary Research Service calls VPNs "a loophole that needs closing"

#276

Post by TacticalCoder »

nirui wrote: post #109

In case people no longer remember, when China started to require websites to register for a license before be allowed to operate, it was for "protecting the children" too. This simple policy then goes on to silence most individual publisher(/self-media) and consolidated the industry into the hands of the few, with no opportunity left for smaller entrepreneurs. This is arguably much worse than allowing children to wat…

> And if EU still think that's not enough, maybe they should just cut the cable, like what North Korea did.

I'll make a similar comment I made on another thread: we saw a thread with many upvotes hating on the cyber-libertarians... We all know the EU institutions are ran by cyber-libertarians and that it's cyber-libertarians making such research and decisions right?

Pick your fight brothers. I don't think spending your time hating on the three John Galts of this world is a worthy fight. You may even turn out to be more morally aligned with the John Galt of this world than with the people running the EU institutions (and North Korea).

Re: EU Parliamentary Research Service calls VPNs "a loophole that needs closing"

#277

Post by jazz9k »

It always seems like the people on the right are almost always correct on calling things like this out early..and ignored as a conspiracy theory by the left, until it's far too late.

The EU was known to be a privacy rights nightmare for at least 10 years now.

Re: EU Parliamentary Research Service calls VPNs "a loophole that needs closing"

#278

Post by JCattheATM »

ckjellqv wrote: post #250
JCattheATM wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like the people you describe were outliers with some preexisting conditions, and probably shouldn't be used as any sort of baseline or point of comparison.

I wouldn't think that since people who don't suffer from these issues outnumber those who do suffer, that makes this not a real issue. Consider the victims of opiate addiction, alcoholism, or sex trafficking. Are those situations so fundamentally different? How many people does one have to know with tragic childhoods for it to be a problem that people take seriously?

There's a big gap between 'some kids get addicted to porn' and 'lets agegate the internet as completely as possible'

Re: EU Parliamentary Research Service calls VPNs "a loophole that needs closing"

#279

Post by pibaker »

abc123abc123 wrote: post #263
port11 wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oops, someone forgot languages evolve! Otherwise you must use Turkye, one of the Middle English spellings. The United Nations agreed to their request, it’s a minor thing to let people spell it the way that was requested. You don’t have to, but others can. Languages evolve.

[flagged]

Lol I haven't seen anyone call Belarus white Russia in what, the past two decades?

Some people do be like that Japanese solider fighting a already lost war decades after.

I have never said turkiye before nor do I care about the country. I will do it now, in your face. Happy Saturday and stay triggered!

Re: EU Parliamentary Research Service calls VPNs "a loophole that needs closing"

#280

Post by roenxi »

delusional wrote: post #190
christophilus wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Parents can protect their children. Source: I’m a parent. My kids haven’t seen porn and can’t access the internet. This doesn’t affect the free exchange of ideas that my fellow countrymen enjoy. Governments getting involved absolutely, unequivocally will be used to clamp down on the free exchange of ideas.

That wasn't the point i was asking for an argument for. What I wanted to know is how age verification is worse then allowing children to watch porn. To make that argument. > Source: I’m a parent. My kids haven’t seen porn and can’t access the internet. Are they above the age of 16? Because then you're either Amish or out of touch.

If you want the logical approach; the premise you're suggesting you want people to argue from is faulty.

The argument kicks in at a slightly deep level. Age verification is unrelated to allowing children to watch porn. Someone needs to make an argument showing that age verification would lead to blocking porn, and that argument seems to be impossible to make (age verification is a much lighter standard than the bans on torrent websites, for example, and torrenting is still as easy as it ever was). To block kids viewing porn there'd need to be a - probably global - system of censorship that exerts total control over what people can POST and GET on the internet. The likes of which we have not yet seen and would likely have catastrophically negative political consequences.

Post reply on HN