Live data from Hacker News

EU to legislate about Chat Control behind closed doors

patrick-breyer.de

161–170 of 463 posts

Re: EU to legislate about Chat Control behind closed doors

#161
post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why let a middleman rentseek?

Where is the rentseeking in that example? Rentseeking is the expenditure of resources to influence the rules so you can charge rent. The sock merchant in the example isn’t.

There are two levels of rentseeking in any tariff example.

The first level is the intended rentseeking: we make imported socks from China more expensive so you buy domestically made socks instead. There are various excusable reasons why you would want to do this, but at the end of the day, we are still assigning the class of people who make socks domestically the ability to charge a supra-competitive price, which is a rent.

The second level is unintended rentseeking. Maybe it turns out the economy really, really doesn't want to fund a domestic sock industry. Maybe our sockmakers are just really, really bad at making socks. Or maybe people really, really want foreign socks. In any of these cases, the people just pay the tariff no matter the cost.

For example, Brazil has had extraordinarily high import tariffs on all sorts of consumer electronics. The intent is to create a domestic electronics industry. The reality is, however, Brazil was never going to be able to support that. Electronics are a highly exportable industry and the global market can only support a few countries being involved in it. So the result is that game consoles and smartphones are just really expensive purely for the benefit of people involved in the tax scheme.

Re: EU to legislate about Chat Control behind closed doors

#162
post #8

This is going to further increase anti-EU sentiment. This is unacceptable behaviour, but no politician is ever going to experience any negative consequences over this because they're so very far removed from the democratic process.

Most of the time, when "the EU" is doing something bad, it's actually the national governments wearing a different hat. The Parliament is pretty reasonable on the average, while the national policicians in the Council take advantage of the ignorance of the public. They can pursue their favorite policies without consequences, as the EU gets all the blame.

[dead]

Re: EU to legislate about Chat Control behind closed doors

#163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of the time, when "the EU" is doing something bad, it's actually the national governments wearing a different hat. The Parliament is pretty reasonable on the average, while the national policicians in the Council take advantage of the ignorance of the public. They can pursue their favorite policies without consequences, as the EU gets all the blame.

Doesn't matter because Apple will happily implement messages scanning immediately and eagerly. And despite let's say Poland not implementing the bill, all iPhones in Poland will snitch on their owners. Tim Cook's Apple is not Steve Jobs' Apple. Case in point: my new Mac purchased in Switzerland and activated in Poland on my US Apple account required me to provide my age in the setup assistant. Neither Poland nor Swit…

Could you clarify what you mean by „required me to provide my age in the setup assistant“? Was is actually required, or optional? Dont they already have your age associated with your iCloud account, or were you creating a new one? Without more details I’m pretty skeptical there is something nefarious here

Re: EU to legislate about Chat Control behind closed doors

#164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rubbish. Fighting fascism by implementing totalitarian tools is a ludicrous idea. Start with dismantling the means by which the information cancer spreads. No more targeted ads, no more data harvesting. Increase privacy. Everybody knows about the influence of Russian bots on the net and yet precisely fuck all is being done about it.

And how do you do that? Either you have some government agency able to quickly decide what is a "Russian bot" and censor it or you have a public deliberation process where evidence is required to be presented before censoring the Russian bot. The former is guaranteed to be abused to censor things that the government doesn't like and the latter is too slow to be of any effect.

You ... Work on aspects of your society that Russian bots can seize on?

Fracture point propaganda campaigns only work because we let those issues fester.

Re: EU to legislate about Chat Control behind closed doors

#165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of the time, when "the EU" is doing something bad, it's actually the national governments wearing a different hat. The Parliament is pretty reasonable on the average, while the national policicians in the Council take advantage of the ignorance of the public. They can pursue their favorite policies without consequences, as the EU gets all the blame.

I don't think you can nicely divide it like that. It seems to be mostly bad individuals, or just individuals with some bad ideas they refuse to give up.

Plus the lobby groups that are behind and provide most of the proposal drafting

Re: EU to legislate about Chat Control behind closed doors

#166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of the time, when "the EU" is doing something bad, it's actually the national governments wearing a different hat. The Parliament is pretty reasonable on the average, while the national policicians in the Council take advantage of the ignorance of the public. They can pursue their favorite policies without consequences, as the EU gets all the blame.

I don't think you can nicely divide it like that. It seems to be mostly bad individuals, or just individuals with some bad ideas they refuse to give up.

[deleted]

Re: EU to legislate about Chat Control behind closed doors

#167
post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While the EU is not perfect and surely needs improvement in many areas, it is still better than not having it. This is why you see a lot of pro-EU content: many people here (myself included) are of the opinion that the EU needs to be improved, not dismantled.

>While the EU is not perfect and surely needs improvement in many areas, it is still better than not having it. Would you still believe this if Chat Control got though? What good did the EU bring that's good enough to make up for the badness of everyone in Europe having all their private digital communications constantly scanned?

If Chat Control gets through, it means the Parliament approved it, which means the EU people voted for politicians that supported the idea. If the EU got dismantled, the same politicians would be elected (they won once why not twice) and do it again at the local level. (though, maybe not in every country)

Re: EU to legislate about Chat Control behind closed doors

#168
post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you kidding me..? The freedom of movement across all member states, including the right to settle and start a business anywhere you like, that's not a "good regulation" to you? Being able to pay in all of those states without paying FX rates, bringing home your purchases across the border without tolls or even checkpoints no less? The funding of a massive amount of public benefit projects in poorer member states,…

>The freedom of movement across all member states, including the right to settle and start a business anywhere you like, that's not a "good regulation" to you That's not regulation, that's a reduction in regulation.

That’s a reduction in prohibitions, not regulation. You cannot enable this without regulating how it works.

Re: EU to legislate about Chat Control behind closed doors

#169
post #8

This is going to further increase anti-EU sentiment. This is unacceptable behaviour, but no politician is ever going to experience any negative consequences over this because they're so very far removed from the democratic process.

[flagged]

Re: EU to legislate about Chat Control behind closed doors

#170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Still, this is mostly pushed by particular countries (e.g. Denmark), the commission and aggressively pursued by lobbyist. The most democratic body in the EU (the EP) has so far always rejected Chat Control. Without the EU, this would have been introduced in some member countries much earlier (see also UK).

>Without the EU, this would have been introduced in some member countries much earlier (see also UK). And without the EU there'd be some states in which it would never be introduced. Decentralization is what made Europe so successful historically compared to large centralized empires like China and the Ottomans, and the EU is destroying that.

What you call decentralization and „so successful“ resulted in constant wars and conflicts. Europe would be in a way worse place right now without some form of union like the EU
Post reply on HN