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

Germany's blanket data retention law is illegal, EU top court says

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–178 of 178 posts

Re: Germany's blanket data retention law is illegal, EU top court says

#171

Post by themitigating »

bonzini wrote: post #95
themitigating wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you are claiming in the DPRK voting is rigged? Do you have proof of this?

In DPRK there is only one choice on the ballot that you can optionally cross out to disapprove. That doesn't happen often or at all; I suppose they'd know who does it based on the time it takes to vote.

Then it's not an election and my statement doesn't apply

This is like saying 'yeah but what if the car turns out to be electric" if I told you to change your oil every 5k miles

Re: Germany's blanket data retention law is illegal, EU top court says

#172

Post by themitigating »

whimsicalism wrote: post #96
themitigating wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What event in Afghanistan are you referring to and can you prove it was because of a lack of legitimacy due to lack of voter participation?

The fall of the government in Kabul. I'm not saying this is the single causal event, but lower than 10% voting definitely contributed to a lack of legitimacy of the central govt leading to its fall.

Do you proof that it was a cause?

Counter is that participation in European country elections is also low, though probably higher than 10 percent, but that didn't cause them to fall

Re: Germany's blanket data retention law is illegal, EU top court says

#173

Post by whimsicalism »

themitigating wrote: post #172
whimsicalism wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fall of the government in Kabul. I'm not saying this is the single causal event, but lower than 10% voting definitely contributed to a lack of legitimacy of the central govt leading to its fall.

Do you proof that it was a cause? Counter is that participation in European country elections is also low, though probably higher than 10 percent, but that didn't cause them to fall

Where in Europe is election participation even close to that low?

Re: Germany's blanket data retention law is illegal, EU top court says

#174

Post by daniel-cussen »

MichaelCollins wrote: post #70
anony999 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who is 100% sovereign? Any kind of treaty makes you less "sovereign". I believe it's the same question about freedom. Are you a free person if you have a job, pay mortgage or marry someone?

> Who is 100% sovereign? 100%? Only those with a nuclear deterrent, and maybe not even them. Otherwise, there is always a bigger fish. Edit: I can see some people don't believe me. Do you really think treaties are more than paper if you don't have force to back them up? The US has threatened to invade the Hague if they try to charge Americans with war crimes. Went beyond mere threats in fact, congress and Bush the yo…

So the list of countries with nuclear arsenals is very short. It ends in North Korea and Israel, basically the rogue state of China (but fiercely independent at the same time, it is not subservient, it assisted China militarily in the hardest times after being carved to pieces for centuries by the nuclear powers of the time, and apparently nobody ever helped the Chinese ever) and secondly Israel, America's rogue state (but fiercely independent at the same time, it is not subservient, it assisted America militarily, and really they get all kinds of exceptions because they invented it, can't realistically stop them from having it).

Secondly France has huge problems with sovereignty because it can't make a computer. That's the impediment to their sovereignty. Nukes the have, that's not the issue. And even America is struggling with supply lines, looks like nobody can make a computer anymore.

Re: Germany's blanket data retention law is illegal, EU top court says

#175

Post by jackvalentine »

prottog wrote: post #167
jackvalentine wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The former Prime Minister of Australia had the Governor General (a largely ceremonial role) secretly swear him in to multiple ministries without the knowledge of the incumbent minister, the parliament or the public. The Governor General didn’t publicise these appointments. The PM then used his new ministerial powers a couple of times. The convention expected was the GG would announce these appointments, he didn’t and…

Politics in the Lucky Country are really mind-boggling sometimes.

That book came out 60 years ago and is still spot on.

Re: Germany's blanket data retention law is illegal, EU top court says

#176

Post by int_19h »

eivarv wrote: post #129
int_19h wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may disagree with that justification, sure. The point is that there are people who are convinced by it.

Whether people are convinced or not – your claim was that it provided "justification". My point is that it does no such thing – it doesn't hold up as a valid argument (which really is the bare minimum for something to even be considered as potentially true).

"Justification", like "legitimacy", is a subjective measure.

Re: Germany's blanket data retention law is illegal, EU top court says

#177

Post by RegnisGnaw »

bonzini wrote: post #95
themitigating wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you are claiming in the DPRK voting is rigged? Do you have proof of this?

In DPRK there is only one choice on the ballot that you can optionally cross out to disapprove. That doesn't happen often or at all; I suppose they'd know who does it based on the time it takes to vote.

The polling station worker watches you, there is no secrecy.

Re: Germany's blanket data retention law is illegal, EU top court says

#178

Post by theplumber »

MichaelCollins wrote: post #160
theplumber wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Do you really think treaties are more than paper if you don't have force to back them up? There is a foce that can build up. If the U.S starts going rough someone else will take its place. We've already seen pieces moving during Trump's term. U.S's soft power helps it more than you think. North Korea is more "sovereign" than the U.S. in your book. Good economic and political relations with your neighbours can make…

> North Korea is more "sovereign" than the U.S. in your book. In practice, the US can do much more of whatever it pleases than North Korea can. The US can invade most countries on a whim, and has demonstrated this ability numerous times in living memory, while the North Korean government mostly just fumes for the past few decades. But more to your point, yes, North Korea has more sovereignty than most; they are one o…

You have a very twisted way to see the world. If NK is more sovereign than most countries why should countries aim for sovereignty?

The bottom line is that the "paper treaties" allowed the world to function and create economic growth/trade not a sovereignty dogma. I think the total sovereignty dogma didn't exist even in the medieval times. Its roots are rather religious. I'm not sure where you want to go with that. Certainly not towards prosperity.

You don't want international treaties with nations you can't invade or what's exactly the gist of it?

Being a super power has benefits. That doesn't mean you can break economic treaties without consequences or that you can invade countries every time you don't like their economic policy. Bad behaviour brings reputational damage. Wars are costly(economic and politically). Soon enough you may find yourself alone and that you are not a super power anymore(i.e Russia).

Being a small country like NK or the UK you can play ball with the system or become poor. If you want to change the system you must be a super power and/or have powerful friends(i.e not sovereign)

Post reply on HN