251–260 of 282 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pray tell, how would stepping closer to a dystopian hellscape help the internet from eating itself? Somehow, having omnipotent watchers is going to make the internet... more fun and welcoming?
I think he means that maybe it‘s for the best if „the internet“ in its current state dies, i.e. people move on from the current platforms towards other ones or real life.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>When a US president is using an executive order to pass a law An executive order isn't a law. It is an instruction for an executive branch agency or committee. https://www.federalregister.gov/presidential-documents/execu...
Pragmatically the difference does not really matter, om the other hand a executive order migth have more action behind it than a law.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because they shouldn't be scanning private messages indiscriminately no matter for what. Lets rephrase it and look at it from "private companies will scan their users private messages for evidence of crimes and report people to police." Where is the limit here? I think it is naive to assume this will stop at csam and will soon be used as a judicial bludgen to extort random citizens for petty crimes that in any other…
Has this happened before? The NSA wiretaps all phone calls - do they extort random citizens for petty crimes that in any other case nobody would ever know or care about? Microsoft has your browsing history - we know this because of the recently unsealed court case. Do they do it? Facebook already ignores this law and scans the content of all private messages anyway. Are they doing what you predicted? I don't think ev…
Part of me wants Chat Control to get passed so that there is more incentive for at least the tech literate to start using more decentralized messaging tools.
They won't. But afaik Chat Control 1.0 was/is in effect but expired. It's not relevant to Signal or Whatsapp because they're e2ee, it's relevant for eBay, Linkedin, perhaps SMS.
So many comments about the EU constantly re-trying the same law with minor tweaks, and about how legislatures do this in general. I wanted to provide an explanation for this behaviour. The way legislation is expected to proceed in countries with parliamentary systems, especially with strong civil services, is that 1) a problem is identified. This can be the civil service detecting it on their own, petitioning from gr…
Step 6 is entirely missing in the EU. The parliament doesn’t form a committee to debate and perhaps refine the law, it just votes on what is put before it.
"The procedure now chosen gives the proponents of Chat Control a significant tactical advantage. Since the law is in its second reading, an absolute majority of 361 votes of all parliament members is required for amendments or a renewed rejection on Thursday. In contrast, a simple majority of the MEPs present is sufficient for the other side. As many parliamentarians have historically already departed by the last day…
What percentage of EU citizens support Chat Control and what percentage oppose it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What percentage of EU citizens support Chat Control and what percentage oppose it?
Why is this answer down voted? Isn't a reasonable question to ask? Are the lawmakers proposing laws the majority of the people want?
Personally, I don't fell lawmakers proposing laws that I want. Firstly, because I don't belive that laws are solutions for problems.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Every single democratic system relies on norms at some level. Democratic isn’t a boolean flag. When the French prime minister is using the 49-3 rule to bypass the parliament that’s undemocratic, that doesn’t make the system itself undemocratic. When a US president is using an executive order to pass a law that’s undemocratic, that doesn’t make the system itself undemocratic. Here the maneuver goes against the spirit…
No. The way the EU is designed has nothing to do with the US or France. First the Parliament and Council (the bodies democratically elected) do not have power of legislative initiative. Then the Commission, which is a "super" executive power, is not democratically elected. Unlike France or the US (the two you mentioned). The EU has an architecture that is fundamentally different from the US or French system. In many…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pragmatically the difference does not really matter, om the other hand a executive order migth have more action behind it than a law.
Even with the hugely expansive U.S. government and executive branch, an executive order is much more restricted in scope than a law passed by congress.
When the congress doesn't even know that the president can do this or that, it's just dictatorship with some theater. In Europe, the EU's powers are much much more limited.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And the worse part is: they do that because the alternative means you're building a railway on a surface tunnel because some people don't like it (or worse, not building anything)
Most infrastructure in Europe predates the EU by quite a bit