141–150 of 656 posts
I think the challenge for society here is not to simply reject attempts like this, but how to prevent them from being pushed over and over until a specific context allows it to be approved.
Priva rights are already there in most countries constitutions, but maybe adding the digital part will make it harder to push back.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"... expression, but you can also be arrested if you say something that could offend someone. ..." You probably mean hate speech. We have laws like that too in Canada. It is a good thing.
How on earth are hate speech laws a good thing? Or did I miss a /s?
Where is Apple in all of this? They're such proponents of privacy that they've actively started encrypting as much as possible for decades but now that the EU is about to break all that they're silent. They raised such a fuss when the FBI asked to decrypt that single iPhone years ago, but now that millions are on the line... nothing?
With regards to the FBI incident, Apple said at the beginning of their statement, “This moment calls for public discussion, and we want our customers and people around the country to understand what is at stake.”
The EU is proposing a law. People assure me their laws are democratic and reflect the will of the people. Who is Apple to reject the outcome of public discussion?
The FBI letter was written in a context where an agency was acting without the support of the public. That’s why the framing was all about misuse of the All Writs Act and lack of Congressional blessing for the requested power.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I suspect it's a mix of many Danish politicians' own authoritarian tendencies/ambitions and corporate lobbying, though I have no proof of the latter when it comes to ChatControl specifically. Generally speaking , there is a lot of dark money in Danish politics, and the EU has repeatedly flagged Denmark as a country lacking in transparency with regards to corporate lobbying: https://www.altinget.dk/artikel/eu-kritik-a…
Interesting. I am not expert on politics of Denmark, so my question is: is this push universal across political parties or it’s a feature of a specific political block that rules for the past X years and consistently worked in this direction?
I think the challenge for society here is not to simply reject attempts like this, but how to prevent them from being pushed over and over until a specific context allows it to be approved.
Is it patently unreasonable? Yes, but cloaked in the “combat corruption” excuse it can be just as effective in a highly-partisan society such as this - just like their “bUt WhAt AbOuT tHe ChIlDrEn” bullshit props up their demands for global surveillance.
I think the challenge for society here is not to simply reject attempts like this, but how to prevent them from being pushed over and over until a specific context allows it to be approved.
The only way I see to prevent the constant pushing is that every single time some council or committee presents something like this every single of one of their private communication gets leaked for everyone to peruse at their leisure from whatsapp to bank statements. They want to erode people's privacy? Let them walk their talk first and see how that goes.
Two cultures: https://benwheatley.github.io/blog/2024/05/25-12.04.31.html
Earlier quoted context omitted.
App stores that operate in the EU are subject to EU law, and can be forced to remove noncompliant apps.
Ahh, but they’ve already mandated side loading to piss off apple! Bit of an own-goal there.
Governments should be transparent and the people should be opaque. Any government that attempts to make things otherwise looses legitimacy.
> Governments should be transparent and the people should be opaque. I'm going to add this to my repertoire since it's a lot more concise than most of my rantings on the topic
What would prevent me from writing my own program to do something simple like sending encrypted messages? Or just emails...