If the article is accurate, this may be stupider than the Australian anti-encryption legislation.
EU chat control law will ban open source operating systems
171–180 of 201 posts
Re: EU chat control law will ban open source operating systems
#172Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean, we sent Ursula von der Leyen as head of the commission to the EU who became infamous in Germany for rather having CSAM stay online as long as she could prevent Germans from seeing it…
Leyen is in favor of CSAM staying online? Do you have a source on that? Are you sure you're not misrepresenting her views?
I'm baffled that you give that woman the benefit of the doubt who literally earned the nickname Zensursula with her hide-instead-of-delete antics in 2009.
Re: EU chat control law will ban open source operating systems
#173Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Why do you think GDPR is some boomer with filofaxes thing?" I handle the GDPR compliance for my company so I've had to get stuck into the topic. Once you start actually trying to apply the various definitions and rules to the real world, they quickly break down. Examples: 1. The core concept in GDPR, personal data, is defined sloppily: "data relating to an identifiable natural person". It doesn't work because "relat…
> so are IP addresses, despite the fact that people do not have IP addresses And car registration numbers and passport numbers and street addresses are also personal identifiable information despite the fact that people does not have those either. Just like IP addresses. This is a good thing. > Personal data is not defined in terms of the context in which it appears This is a good thing because it closes a dozen loop…
> And car registration numbers and passport numbers and street addresses are also personal identifiable information despite the fact that people does not have those either. Just like IP addresses
The analogy doesn't work. A passport number is always "of" a person, because passports are issued to people. An IP address is often, (even usually, for IPv4), far-removed from an individual. Also see M95D's response above: "no it's not". You're confident that there's a good reason why an IP address is personal data and he's confident it's not personal data. This is what I mean when I say it's a poorly-written law.
> This is a good thing because it closes a dozen loopholes and allows good-faith actors to remain on the right side of the law without much effort.
Fair enough; in my opinion, ambiguity and hand-waving in legislation is too high a price to pay, and is also unnecessary. It's literally their job to codify the rules rigorously.
> This just shows a poor understanding of the law, or you are just hand-waving things you have no knowledge about. This is not how the GDPR works. At all.
I know my example isn't a real contradiction (and see also M95D's response in which he points out how the rules actually apply). I'm giving an example of language and terminology in the law which is on its face confusing and sloppy.
Re: EU chat control law will ban open source operating systems
#174Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Why do you think GDPR is some boomer with filofaxes thing?" I handle the GDPR compliance for my company so I've had to get stuck into the topic. Once you start actually trying to apply the various definitions and rules to the real world, they quickly break down. Examples: 1. The core concept in GDPR, personal data, is defined sloppily: "data relating to an identifiable natural person". It doesn't work because "relat…
> 1. The core concept in GDPR, personal data, is defined sloppily: "data relating to an identifiable natural person". It doesn't work because "relating to" is a hand-wave. Your name is obviously personal data, but (according to mainstream legal interpretation) so are IP addresses, despite the fact that people do not have IP addresses, network interfaces do. No, it's not, unless you have logs or database records that…
> No, it's not, unless you have logs or database records that links the IP address to a person (such as a login from that IP). And I bet you do, that's why it bothers you.
Nope, the scenario is which this came up for me was about keeping IP addresses in a blacklist in a firewall. No logs or linking or anything.
> Users can leave data that identifies them in various places. Sometimes they do it intentionally, sometimes not. It's your job to warn them and obtain consent.
If it's my job to obtain individuals' consent to process their personal data in contexts where they have no business putting personal data, the law is poorly-designed.
> In this case, removing data is a legal obligation you have. Processing data (by deleting it) to obey law is one of the exceptions in GDPR (art.6/1./c, and also art.17/3./b). https://gdpr-info.eu/art-6-gdpr/ https://gdpr-info.eu/art-17-gdpr/
Thanks for the info and links, that's genuinely useful. For the record I know my example isn't a watertight logical gotcha; it's an example of how GDPR's language is (IMHO) imprecise and unhelpful.
Re: EU chat control law will ban open source operating systems
#175Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If software dev had been licensed and regulated this way we’d have only a tiny fraction of what we have now in terms of languages, OSes, tooling, etc. It's starting to sound like a very good idea. > There are specific areas where it makes sense but doing it broadly will just halt all innovation. Or speed it by focusing efforts on well designed software.
Yea, like the Windows 9x days. The best days ever, for sure. The best days for a fucking disaster and a collapse of the Western economy in a matter of days if you suggested that turd.
I'm not sure this kind of comment adds to the conversation in any meaningful way.
Re: EU chat control law will ban open source operating systems
#176Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yea, like the Windows 9x days. The best days ever, for sure. The best days for a fucking disaster and a collapse of the Western economy in a matter of days if you suggested that turd.
I'm not sure this kind of comment adds to the conversation in any meaningful way.
Neither does making all "uncertified" software illegal. That' s against the whole idea of free as in freedom software.
And thanks to that software we are talking seamlessly over the net.
Re: EU chat control law will ban open source operating systems
#177I am the first person to appreciate the pro-online-privacy legislation from the EU in the last couple of years. Yet...How can the same organization be behind this? Is it a result of the sheer size of the org, with malevolent people reeking their ugly heads? A more cynical "privacy legislation as a smoke screen with totalitarian measures in the backend"?
The effectiveness of EU machinery is overrated. EU is a large organization with lots and lots of money. The people who go there are largely unaccountable to their countries, and are likely to do things that are popular, and they like to show off their work. There is no repercussions for the decisions taken though, because the only elected positions (the parliament) are far removed from legislating and limited to just…
It troubles me deeply that we in America often cannot make an argument about advocating something without using EU as a crutch. Both left and right wings of the political sphere. Examples:
Ok: We shouldn’t allow abortion beyond trimester.
Better: We shouldn’t allow abortion beyond trimester, that’s how it works in most EU countries.
Ok: Vaccine mandates are not cool.
Better: Vaccine mandates are not cool, just look at Sweden.
Ok: Voting should require IDs.
Better: Voting should require IDs, just look at EU.
My country has a deep malaise of insecurity and inability to rationally think for itself. We were leading our ideas with basis of good arguments in 1950-1980s, then came all the things we want to idealize about EU.
Nothing against EU, they should be promoting independent thought and not copy Americans either. Please don’t make arguments about what specific examples I gave. They may not be accurate but there are many more like this. The point to argue is not about vaccines or whatever, it’s about independent thought and policy.
Re: EU chat control law will ban open source operating systems
#178Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure this kind of comment adds to the conversation in any meaningful way.
Neither does making all "uncertified" software illegal. That' s against the whole idea of free as in freedom software. And thanks to that software we are talking seamlessly over the net.
> Neither does making all "uncertified" software illegal
facepalm who ever said that? Are you trolling or what?
Re: EU chat control law will ban open source operating systems
#179I'm so tired of it all. Countless times it has been tried to enact laws like this. And it's not just this surveillance law that depresses me, reading up on the cyber resilience act just feels to me like it will suck even more fun out of software development, at least in a professional context.
This isn't in relation to either the chat control law or the cyber resilience act, I haven't read either proposal in enough detail to have a strong opinion on them. But I want to comment on the "sucking the fun out of professional software development" part. Should we expect professional software development to be fun? There's a lot of laws out there which arguably "suck the fun out of" civil engineering, but I certa…
[deleted]
Re: EU chat control law will ban open source operating systems
#180And ... it is gone from the front page. HN is explicitely not the place for political activism of any kind, however justified the cause, just remember that, than you are not enraged by it. And my general point on this is: I'd like to see them try. It likely will get softened up quite a lot, but if they really go through with it, they will turn lots of technical (or just privacy concerned) people into criminals over n…
We downweighted it because this topic has had lots of discussion [1] and the current article didn't seem to contain significant new information [2, 3].
It's possible that was a wrong call; I didn't look closely at the article. If you or anyone feel strongly about a case like this you should email us at hn@ycombinator.com and make an argument for why the article and thread are worth re-ranking.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34608595
[2] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...
[3] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...