Live data from Hacker News

EU Parliamentary Research Service calls VPNs "a loophole that needs closing"

cyberinsider.com

171–180 of 467 posts

Re: EU Parliamentary Research Service calls VPNs "a loophole that needs closing"

#171
post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Website called "Hacker News" has had zilch to do with the Hacking community for almost a decade now. It's VC and corporate apologist news.

Are you calling me a corporate apologist? For one, corporations want less regulation. "Being a hacker" does not mean "being stuck in the 80s", IMO. If TooBigTech cryptographically controls everything, it becomes harder to hack. Are you aware that the biggest restriction against jailbreaking stuff is that it was made super illegal... because it helps corporations?

> Are you calling me a corporate apologist? For one, corporations want less regulation

Ah yes, so that's why Meta et al are the main ones behind pushes for more "think of the children" ID verification/attestation regulations.

Re: EU Parliamentary Research Service calls VPNs "a loophole that needs closing"

#172

Here we go again with new restrictions on civil liberties. This is Chat Control all over again. The EU won't stop until it has access to all your data, all your messages, anything you read, save, send will be scrutinized by the the big great EU and it's little minions. Hey, at least we get the freedom of movement right?

There is no such thing as the EU wants X . There are huge differences between what the European Commission, the European Council, and the majority of the European Parliament want. Most of the anti-privacy crap hasn't happened thanks to the EU . Particular countries and lobbying groups have been pushing this through the Commission and Council and most attempts have been rejected by the EP. If we didn't have the EU, so…

> There is no such thing as the EU wants X. There are huge differences between what the European Commission, the European Council, and the majority of the European Parliament want.

Of course there is such a thing as EU wants X. The commission drafts laws and presents them to the MEPs who vote on them. The MEPs do not have the ability to propose their own laws. So all these bullshit laws that are voted on originate from the commission.

If I tell you that you can have a red balloon and you only choice is either to accept or reject the balloon, then you don't really have a choice do you? You can't say I want a blue balloon.

> Most of the anti-privacy crap hasn't happened thanks to the EU. Particular countries and lobbying groups have been pushing this through the Commission and Council and most attempts have been rejected by the EP.

Most attempts? And that should somehow reassure me?

Here is another law that was overturned after many years even though everyone knew it was illegal from the start: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Retention_Directive. It only took something like 8 years.

When Romania protested that this was illegal under their constitution, the EU sued them and forced them to spy on their own citizens. So thank you but no thank you.

> If we didn't have the EU, some countries would have long introduced this nonsense (like the UK). But in the EU that does not make much sense, since there is a single market, so you have to enforce it EU-wide.

On the contrary, if we did not have the EU then it would not be such a problem because the same people who are pushing for this crap would have to repeat the same process 27 times, one in each country and they would have to convince/bribe their way into each government. Instead they can now push this stuff through the commission and it gets voted on and if approved gets applied to 450M people in one go.

That is the definition of single point of failure if I have ever seen one.

> The European Parliament + courts of justice/human rights are one of the last beacons of democracy/freedom worldwide that resist upcoming authoritarianism. We should support them and remind the Parliament over and over again that they should be continuing the good fight.

Do we now have to resort to this sort of emotional arguments? The EU as a whole is 27 countries, the world has more than 200 countries today. Are you claiming that most of them are hell-hole under some sort of tyrannical government? You can't be serious.

This is my problem with the EU supporters these days, you guys are so quick to shove in everyone throats the amazing stuff that the EU supposedly does for us every day but as soon as someone complains, you revert to using the same tactics as populists with the US vs Them rhetoric, the emotional manipulative language and what not.

Also your last paragraph is in complete contradiction with your previous statement. Somehow the EU/European parliament is the last bastion of democracy/freedom but it stills wants to access my private messages and emails (for my own good of course), and now it wants to force VPNs to record identifying information of its users (for our own good again).

If what you say is true then we wouldn't be having this conversation because anyone who proposes this sort of law should have been ostracized and kicked out of the commission in no time. Yet here we are.

> By the way, nearly all your comments on HN are about politics and all trying to sow dissent on Western (and especially European) democracies.

Ha, yes, you got me! I can see that when the push comes to shove it's easier to go for the subtle ad-hominem or character attacks.

God forbid someone in Europe could have any issues with the way things are going at the moment. Seems highly suspicious.

Should I send you a copy of my EU passports? Maybe that's whats going to be required in a few years time to post online if the all-mighty EU gets its way but I can understand if you want to start doing the policing early. After all we can never be too careful.

By the way, I love the new definition of democracy theses days: agree with us about everything or we will consider you a Chinese/Russian/Populist/evil (take your pick) troll.

Its perfectly fitting with the way the EU is trending down towards authoritarianism and subtle freedom of speech suppression.

Re: EU Parliamentary Research Service calls VPNs "a loophole that needs closing"

#173
post #141
post #109

In case people no longer remember, when China started to require websites to register for a license before be allowed to operate, it was for "protecting the children" too. This simple policy then goes on to silence most individual publisher(/self-media) and consolidated the industry into the hands of the few, with no opportunity left for smaller entrepreneurs. This is arguably much worse than allowing children to wat…

But you are asking logical questions. You are thinking and talking too much for a World citizen in 2026. "Reasoning" is a reserved word for chatbots now, so we humans are not allowed to do that anymore. We can only obey like a bot and pretend all the lies they tell are the truth. BTW I live in Turkiye where the government banned ALL the adult websites around 2008. Even as an adult you can't access them. This year the…

Grab a SIM-card from Bulgaria with roaming enabled. Internet is routed through the Bulgarian ISP even when you are in Turkiye. Full internet access, no VPN required.

Re: EU Parliamentary Research Service calls VPNs "a loophole that needs closing"

#174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> By the way, nearly all your comments on HN are about politics and all trying to sow dissent on Western (and especially European) democracies. Disclaimer first: I'm not trying to protect him and I'm not tied to him in any possible way. But since when constantly expressing your own opinion (that's what I assume given the age of the account; maybe I'm wrong, but this seems rather like a person than a bot) is a deliber…

Talking continually about politics is against the HN guidelines.

Politics and tech are basically intertwined at this point. Tech is also intertwined with Geo-politics, tax policies, mental health, and a bunch of other issues.

One cannot talk about tech without talking inevitably of the second or third order effects that derive from it which is again almost inevitably linked to politics either in the US or elsewhere.

Re: EU Parliamentary Research Service calls VPNs "a loophole that needs closing"

#176
post #165
post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Broadcast TV had a very simple solution to this problem: Only air the not-for-kids stuff at times of the day when the kids are already asleep, i.e. late in the evening or at night. It was still the job of the parents to set the bed times etc, but at least this was something the parents could actually control. And for pay-per-view stations with actual heavily violent or pornographic content: Yes, they were absolutely…

and who sets that pin? It's the parents, not the cable company.

This is correct. I think the difference is that the PIN actually is an effective tool that parents can use to keep their kids from watching this stuff. It's also default-deny as the PIN is pre-set, and the parents would have to make a conscious efforts to allow viewing.

Im contrast, the internet is default-permit: Everyone can access everything, unless the device is specifically set up to block it. Setting up such a block has the risk of causing massive drama with your kids, and they fill probably quickly find ways to circumvent it anyway.

This is why I find the "it's the parent's responsibility" calls so hypocritical: The whole idea behind the internet is to make it as hard as possible to block things. But suddenly we expect the parents to do exactly that? How?

(All that independent of the point that the current push for age verification really seems like a disguised push for control. But that doesn't mean there isn't a real problem. Both things can be true at the same time)

Re: EU Parliamentary Research Service calls VPNs "a loophole that needs closing"

#177
post #158
post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Need is a very strong word. I'd call it a desire. Currently you can often identify people, sure, but there's hassle involved. What they want to do is to plug in a private corporation separate from whatever service that is likely to be more loyal with the state apparatus than the service, or else it is easily switched out for another. And corporations are having issues discerning bots from people without making access…

> Currently you can often identify people, sure, but there's hassle involved You vastly underestimate the current state of surveillance capitalism. > You could also look at who is heavily lobbying for this, you'll find it is fascist tech oligarchs from the US. Go in the street, and ask a bunch of random people: "If there was a way to prevent kids from accessing stuff that is bad for them, and it had no downsides. Wou…

Well why did you say to them it doesnt have downsides? It has downsides and a very essential one like privacy.

Re: EU Parliamentary Research Service calls VPNs "a loophole that needs closing"

#178
post #109

In case people no longer remember, when China started to require websites to register for a license before be allowed to operate, it was for "protecting the children" too. This simple policy then goes on to silence most individual publisher(/self-media) and consolidated the industry into the hands of the few, with no opportunity left for smaller entrepreneurs. This is arguably much worse than allowing children to wat…

You always hear the argument "protecting the children", because anyone oposing the regulation/laws can be labeled at best "exposing the children to danger" or at worst "pedofile". So as a consequence at best the oponents of such regulation/laws should not be listened to, or at worst they should be put into prison.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_of_the_children

Re: EU Parliamentary Research Service calls VPNs "a loophole that needs closing"

#179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no such thing as the EU wants X . There are huge differences between what the European Commission, the European Council, and the majority of the European Parliament want. Most of the anti-privacy crap hasn't happened thanks to the EU . Particular countries and lobbying groups have been pushing this through the Commission and Council and most attempts have been rejected by the EP. If we didn't have the EU, so…

> By the way, nearly all your comments on HN are about politics and all trying to sow dissent on Western (and especially European) democracies. Disclaimer first: I'm not trying to protect him and I'm not tied to him in any possible way. But since when constantly expressing your own opinion (that's what I assume given the age of the account; maybe I'm wrong, but this seems rather like a person than a bot) is a deliber…

I appreciate the support but I am not surprised.

Even on HN there is been a surge of users who instead of defending their arguments or positions on certain sensitive topics such as the EU prefer to simply smear the opposition.

I write about the EU a lot because I live there and I am especially interested in what the EU is doing regarding tech.

I am especially critical of policies that target my private life and it irks me to no end that some people will claim loud a and clear that I should simply be grateful for what the EU is doing when the EU's actions in a lot of matters that I care about have either been deceptive and/or completely went against the supposed principles that the EU is supposed to have.

Re: EU Parliamentary Research Service calls VPNs "a loophole that needs closing"

#180
post #96
post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it is possible to "pretend that they want something reasonable", it means that there is something reasonable somewhere. Maybe some want more control, but most certainly not everybody. > so that pervasive monitoring If you haven't gotten the memo, pervasive monitoring already exists. To sell ads. > or permission and/or deanonymization is normalized For age verification, it's possible to do it in a privacy-preservin…

guy on website called hackernews, tries to convince everyone more restrictions are good

Regulations are also restrictions, lots of people here are pro regulation when it comes to things they don't like.

This topic is just unfavorable with this community... for good reasons.

Post reply on HN