As if I wasn't apathetic enough about democracy. The only voting bill worth caring about is the one in the wallet. Then you can be the source of the corruption, instead of the sink. Every man for themselves.
EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0
631–640 of 947 posts
Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0
#632With this level of spying it becomes important to learn to use technologies that are outside of this system that people on HN usually laugh at. Tor, VPNs, Bitcoin, Bitchat, Nostr based socials, Signal and get some extra clean hardware (phone, laptop...) to work with when you need to...
Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0
#633Earlier quoted context omitted.
> and, at least for now, still post on social media without getting a knock on my door. That's called "luck". A friend of mine did likewise, and got a knock, then handcuffs, then a trial. He was acquitted because everything he said was allowed under the first amendment. In fact, several academics had published the same/similar stuff he did and not had any problems (or ever worried about them). But he was of the wrong…
> That's called "luck". I think it's actually called statistics. In 2026, it would seem I'm statistically less likely to get arrested for a social media post in the US than the UK. I mean it's not like the reason is hidden. Arrests typically require crossing into narrow unprotected categories under the First Amendment: true threats (Virginia v. Black standard), incitement to imminent lawless action (Brandenburg v. Oh…
Got a link for those UK stats? Last time I went looking, even a Parliamentary report expressed that the stats are difficult to find, because the crime is eg malicious communications which covers a lot of acts.
Your links in another comment do not contain nearly enough detail to support the argument you're attempting to make. The 2 laws mentioned therein are broad and could cover many acts.
It's like a newspaper looking at the statistics for murder and creating a story that murder by asphyxiation with a pillow is on the rise.
n.b. I am not disagreeing that the police are policing social media. It's obviously an easy target. But we should be careful of newspapers pushing narratives, by asking for precise data
Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0
#634Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do they? What I read now and in the past is mostly Americans being proud somehow (with Trump doing whatever he feels like to fill his family's pockets).
[flagged]
Is it not comparable in this case? Two western rich nations being undemocratic. At least in the EU there is voting (pointless in this case, but often effective); the US dude just does whatever he wants while the people are against it (ratings and wars which were promised would not happen etc).
Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0
#635This is a nice piece of democracy right here: "a measure it had rejected twice in March. Although a majority of voting Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) actually opposed the regulation (314 against, 276 in favor, 17 abstentions), the motion to reject it failed to secure the required absolute majority of 361 votes. As a result, mass scanning is now permitted again until 2028." "Oh no we can't get a majority to…
Not only was Chat Control 1.0 already rejected twice by the European Parliament but: - This vote took place on last day of the session when many MEPs had already left for Summer vacation - 112 MEPs of 719 didn't vote. - The vote was called only two days before as an "Rule 170 - Urgent procedure" - 73 MEPs missed the vote making it "urgent". Normally it takes months of procedure to come up for a final vote.
> This vote took place on last day of the session when many MEPs had already left for Summer vacation
Surely this was not by someone’s design. Maybe though… you don’t leave a day early for your vacation?
Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0
#636This is a nice piece of democracy right here: "a measure it had rejected twice in March. Although a majority of voting Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) actually opposed the regulation (314 against, 276 in favor, 17 abstentions), the motion to reject it failed to secure the required absolute majority of 361 votes. As a result, mass scanning is now permitted again until 2028." "Oh no we can't get a majority to…
Ah, "it's only democracy if you vote my way" argument. We usually call that type of governing something else.
Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0
#637Earlier quoted context omitted.
Some European countries like Germany do, but the EU somehow can override those national constitutions.
It cannot. EU laws are completely useless and must be implemented by every government as a local law, which won't be more powerful than the constitution. The problem is that constitutional courts should then say the law was against the constitution and cancel it, but will that happen?
> EU laws are completely useless and must be implemented by every government as a local law
This isn’t true. Regulations are directly applicable and don’t require national legislation; directives generally do. Individuals affected by a failure to implement a directive can complain to the European Commission, which can bring infringement proceedings against the member state and potentially seek financial penalties.
EU law also has primacy over conflicting national law, and the CJEU’s position is that this includes constitutional provisions. Courts in Germany and Poland have challenged that position, but refusing to comply can put the countries in breach of their EU treaty obligations and lead to infringement proceedings and penalties.
Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0
#638Earlier quoted context omitted.
It cannot. EU laws are completely useless and must be implemented by every government as a local law, which won't be more powerful than the constitution. The problem is that constitutional courts should then say the law was against the constitution and cancel it, but will that happen?
In theory, it can't. But in reality, it does in important cases. Germany has implemented EU sanctions against a German journalist, which deprive him and his family of the ability to conduct basically any economic activity in Germany or even to leave the country. He is not allowed to work. No one is allowed to pay him money. He has to petition the government every time he wants to access even a small amount of the mon…
Very weird case. I don't think anyone can survive here in Germany on a 503€ allowance he gets, and let alone having some probable but unproven ties to a state considered an enemy since only recently, I would find crippling someone to that degree harsh even for a convicted war criminal. He's apparently not even allowed to pay rent!
Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0
#639This is a nice piece of democracy right here: "a measure it had rejected twice in March. Although a majority of voting Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) actually opposed the regulation (314 against, 276 in favor, 17 abstentions), the motion to reject it failed to secure the required absolute majority of 361 votes. As a result, mass scanning is now permitted again until 2028." "Oh no we can't get a majority to…
Wow does it become law if the majority of those present opposed it? The American Congress might be utterly dysfunctional, but we’ve never had a law pass despite the majority of members voting against it. What am I missing?
The fact that there was a second vote on a modified law which passed.
Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0
#640Earlier quoted context omitted.
Reddit is one of the few remaining platforms where reach is determined democratically. You demean that populous by calling it the singular "reddit", as if it's a single hive mind. But you'll probably get your way, I imagine the billionaire censorship campaign will come for it too eventually. Then you'll only ever get to hear thoughts you agree with, glorious day ey?
Reddit is the most censored platform out there… posts and users that are not aligned with subreddit mods get banned or deleted prolifically. Subreddits that do not align similarly soon find themselves banned
Subreddits get banned for egregious shit. Reddit stays on the side of letting subs up, rather than banning.
Reddit has made it harder for mods to find out which subs you are active in, so that you can’t be banned for activity in subs that are in cold wars with each other.