181–190 of 393 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Neat! I guess you’ll be advocating for whatever the next advancement in USB ports is becoming mandated as soon as it’s available, too?
We won't need backwards incompatible advancements in this space for awhile, you seem grumpy that the EU is doing good for consumers rather than mega corporations.
Good. Thanks to the EU I have to click "cookie question" every where I go. Thanks guys for wasting the limited time I have in life.
The complete lack of design standards is what kills the utility. They should all have 3 buttons: "accept all" or "reject all" or "customize", dead simple. Every time it's a different design, different button text, different options. Usually rejecting = multi layers of options. A perfect example of good intentions making bad policy.
- Accept all
- Mandatory for function non-tracking cookies only
- Reject all
There should be a standardised browser accessible interface so browsers can automatically choose the one you want on your behalf based on your browser settings.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For the curious, in Switzerland, you don't keep ammo at home, there's proper registration of weapons with proper background checks, and it's treated more as a means of national defense, so having lots of guns is going to get you odd looks from people. Guns aren't seen as something for personal defense: that's the job of the police. In other words, Switzerland has a much healthier attitude towards gun ownership and us…
Switzerland has a more traditional, not healthier, relationship between the people and the state: the people are subjects who are given tiny freedoms, but are kept on tight leash, because the state has a deep distrust of its people. The abberation with guns is just insecurity of the state: it's small and needs its people to act as part-time military in reserve. If it had a bigger military, the fake gun rights would d…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Personally I’m uncomfortable that a centralised government is “choosing the winner” rather than having the standards duke it out on the open market. In this case, USB-C is pretty much expected to win and be the dominant standard - even Apple was already moving towards it way before the mandate - but it’s the principle of it. In what other area will the EU elect itself to “choose the winner” next? The whole thing sets…
This kind of regulation is one of the most basic functions of government, without which trade between states and countries becomes much more difficult. Of all the things a government can do, requiring certain standards on things like connector types seems the most reasonable.
Some people will benefit from their standard being chosen as the winner. This is just corruption waiting to happen.
It’s fine I guess if the choices are functionally identical (although that still leaves the issue of corruption if there is money involved) or the market has already clearly chosen what it wants by mass adopting a standard (USB-C has not reached that state yet) and the government is just “making it official” - it would however leave the updating of the standard at the government’s discretion since the mandate would need to be relaxed as it would prevent a successor standard from gaining popularity.
How would you feel if the US government mandated Windows for all desktops and servers and Android for all mobile devices? It improves interoperability … Or perhaps mandate all programs be written in C++ … again interoperability.
Are there any internationally relevant internet companies in Europe? Spotify comes to mind. Then .. I can't think of anything. No search engine. No browser. No operating system. No social network. No ecommerce company. No cloud computing platform. No financial services company. No transportation company. No travel company. No nothing. Except for a $20B music aggregator, there is not a single sector of the web where E…
[1] https://www.politico.eu/article/emmanuel-macron-joe-biden-us...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Control may be the wrong thing here. Every technology, at some point, will inevitably bring questions of legal liability and culpability, and AI has a large tendency to do so because of how applicable it is. It’s not the worst idea to try and get ahead of the problem by defining a legal framework. Examples of how a free-for-all has resulted in legal questions; * police and the judiciary in the US have come under fire…
Sure but you can’t ban something without knowing what it is yet. And if you try, you end up writing something vague that doesn’t actually fix the problem and instead bans something else. Case in point is the EU having to write something vague and it turns out they had no idea what was coming. Maybe just wait until there is a problem before trying to write vague laws IMO.
> The regulation, proposed by the Commission in 2021, was designed to ban some AI applications like social scoring, manipulation and some instances of facial recognition. It would also designate some specific uses of AI as “high-risk,” binding developers to stricter requirements of transparency, safety and human oversight.
The issue is that as written it would still not cover general AI and that would still be legally grey.
Some of those uses in the US have already been problematic, like Madison Square Garden using computer vision to ban any lawyers from firms suing them from their vast properties, which is actually against various laws like their liquor license.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Same in the US, of course. Suicide by gun counted as 'gun violence' is the classic disingenuous deception. Remove those and gang violence (primarily against rival gangs), and the numbers don't look that scary, which is the issue for those with an agenda.
From an international perspective, most reporting about gun control being a big issue in the US appears to come from mass shootings, not the misc. causes such as gang activity or suicides.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The credit score system already in place in the US is frequently as arbitrary in some cases already. You get punished for just looking at it. I don't think I need to preach to HN about that (crypto money and all that). Does Europe do it much differently? Almost every country has some kind of credit reporting system, but many of them differ from the US in how they do it. In particular, in many countries, credit bure…
Yup. Until recently, Australia only had negative event reporting. Still, you’d regularly have kids that had been brainwashed by US-centric personal finance gurus (and American media more generally) asking how they could boost their “credit score”. Fully willing to sign up for and use credit cards as an 18-year-old student to juice some system they had been led to believe existed in the first place.
Good. Thanks to the EU I have to click "cookie question" every where I go. Thanks guys for wasting the limited time I have in life.
It's not the EU's fault that you have to click cookie banners. Those banners are only required if a website plans to do malicious things with the cookies. If they're used to track who's logged in, they are not required. They are more akin to the "Do not eat" warnings on silica packs... except on the internet everyone swallows.
Theoretically websites could choose to do better, but the EU should absolutely have predicted this outcome.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Computers are employed by trained professionals appropriately in military contexts. The public does not need access to computers for this to happen.
There's no task I cannot complete without ketamine, except for the consumption of ketamine itself. Without a computer I cannot perform my job, nor basically perform any modern professional job.