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

French govt. says users of uBlock Origin, Signal etc. are potential terrorists

laquadrature.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 553 posts

Re: French govt. says users of uBlock Origin, Signal etc. are potential terrorists

#281

Post by pif »

Qiu_Zhanxuan wrote: post #202
pif wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in France as well, and personally do not feel the same negativity as you. What I don't appreciate at all is our share of idiots that think that blocking the country is a proper way of protesting (see "gilets jaunes"). That is not democratic, when a minority imposes their will to the silent majority.

I'm always appalled by comments like these that justify their sympathy for authoritarian practices simply because they align with their interests. I'm in Paris, France, and police brutality has been increasing hand in hand with the corrupt nature of our government over the last decade, and it's horrifying. The apple is completely rotten; the way our election system works and all the dirty tricks you can do when you'r…

> sympathy for authoritarian practices simply because they align with their interests

Nothing personal, I'm talking about the interests of all the voters who freely elected the current president and parliament.

If you are not happy, it's our duty as a society to provide you a way to express your point. But the right to express your point does not involve the violence to get our attention. Most people just want to go on with their daily life, and putting obstacles to them will not gather any sympathy around you.

Re: French govt. says users of uBlock Origin, Signal etc. are potential terrorists

#282

Post by qsdf38100 »

beremaki wrote: post #158

Situation in France will not end well. Both rule of law and liberal democracy are increasingly damaged. Our institutions are so weak that we are one election away from a complete disaster. Our constitution always concentrated a lot of power in the hand of the president but there is no effective counter-power left. The government set multiple precedent that violate freedom of assembly and association and parliamentary…

Come on, this is so exaggerated.

If you care about democracy, you have much more relevant menace in France. People are screaming about Macron for some reason. Because they were told he is a DiCtAtOr!! Because he didn’t fold to unions. Apparently unions are to be obeyed otherwise you are a dictator? While obeying to elected government is dictatorship? It’s a nice inversion.

The true authoritarian menace in France comes from the far right and far left. Melenchon is in love with authoritarian leaders (see bolivarian alliance), he can’t help screaming at people that disagree with him. His political career should have been ended by just a few of his outbursts. But he gets a pass for some reason. And don’t get me started on the far right, screaming that we are in a dictatorship while admiring Putin…

Of course you can criticize Macron, he’s far from perfect, but if you care about democracy, focusing on him being THE issue is outright ridiculous. We have far more serious threats. You are completely missing the big picture. And people being told to fight Macron instead of the extremes is a serious threat. I can’t believe I have to explain that.

Re: French govt. says users of uBlock Origin, Signal etc. are potential terrorists

#284

Post by pif »

James_bread wrote: post #227
pif wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> First they came for the Gilets Jaunes... Actually, they came too late for the Gilets Jaunes! > it was sickening to see how much of the supposed French people's liberties and citizens rights were broken back then I agree with you, a bunch of idiots holding a whole country hostage was not at all what one would expect in a sane democracy.

Pif, your messages here align mostly with authoritarianism and fascism. You don't seem to care about people their freedom, their rights or real democracy. It's not a minority that holds the country hostage it's a minority who have the balls to standup against a small elite who have all power. Having to pick out of two evils has nothing to do with democracy.

> our messages here align mostly with authoritarianism and fascism

If you want to call "authoritarianism" the basic rule of law (as in: do not block traffic, do not prevent shops from opening, do not prevent public offices from offering their services...) you are welcome.

By the way, a pet peeve of mine, having always voted for the centre-left, I never appreciated how authoritarianism is generally considered an expression of the extreme right, while history shows that dictatorship was the evil of both extremes.

> You don't seem to care about people their freedom

I do care about the freedom of all people, and that is why I detest when protesters use violence (which is wrong) in order to gather attention for their point (which may be right).

> minority who have the balls to standup against a small elite who have all power.

I respect your opinion, even if I don't share it.

Re: French govt. says users of uBlock Origin, Signal etc. are potential terrorists

#285

Post by qsdf38100 »

jle17 wrote: post #231
FreelanceX wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> EU knows and complains about Poland & Hungary but France is going to be a shitshow of a far worse magnitude. I am French too and this sounds greatly exaggerated. Either you don't really know about the situation in Hungary or you have a very twisted view of what's happening in France (maybe induced by the medias). You should take a step back.

There is definitely a tendency to authoritarianism and confusionism from the current government, directed at political opposition. "Security" laws extending the powers of the police and creating new ways to criminalize protest have been passed at a constant rhythm over the years since Sarkozy's time. After the state of urgency of 2015, part of the dispositions where simply put into law permanently. Police has been in…

[flagged]

Re: French govt. says users of uBlock Origin, Signal etc. are potential terrorists

#286

Post by BiteCode_dev »

martin8412 wrote: post #174
BiteCode_dev wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but the problem here is not that, it's the arguments used to build the case. They have not been any evidence of criminal activities by those people. So far, all what they have against them is "they are protective about their privacy". That's a terrible reason to arrest and maintain people in jail.

The act of going to Syria to fight on either side is a crime in itself.

Not according to the French law.

A crime is not something you evaluate morally. It has a very narrow definition that is codified by each society it is been judged in.

Re: French govt. says users of uBlock Origin, Signal etc. are potential terrorists

#287

Post by tut-urut-utut »

throwaway290 wrote: post #203
beremaki wrote: post #158

Situation in France will not end well. Both rule of law and liberal democracy are increasingly damaged. Our institutions are so weak that we are one election away from a complete disaster. Our constitution always concentrated a lot of power in the hand of the president but there is no effective counter-power left. The government set multiple precedent that violate freedom of assembly and association and parliamentary…

I am not French but my opinion of the current government is at rock bottom after how Macron recently went to China to basically suck up to Xi Jinping, completely ignoring human rights violations and all. And for what?

You criticise Macron for visiting a „dictator“ but not for being dictator himself?

Macrons pushing of retirement law change against both public and parliament is definitely not democratic.

Re: French govt. says users of uBlock Origin, Signal etc. are potential terrorists

#288

Post by junon »

Arkhaine_kupo wrote: post #269
junon wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's interesting. So even if the judge knows their ruling could be the worst of several options, they're boxed into doing so because it's the law?

What do you mean the worst of several options? The law is the law, if it's unfair it gets changed. Having the judge "making it up" as he goes, and then another judge using that sentence 120 years later as precedent like in american courts sounds insane

What you describe does not match reality.

Re: French govt. says users of uBlock Origin, Signal etc. are potential terrorists

#289

Post by BiteCode_dev »

ElMocambo_x4 wrote: post #278
BiteCode_dev wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, but they are very serious and diligent in their actions. They have been nothing but rational and respectful in everything they have done so far. You can see it in the writing of the article, it's methodical, logical, and rely strongly on facts through quoting documents. This have been consistent for years, something I give them a lot of credits for. Besides, no matter the political orientation of the govt, I th…

No, their bias is grotesque. They make it sound like the DGSI bothered monitoring some dudes because they are using uBlock origins, lmfao. For the US guys here, the equivalent would be the FBI tracking down a few guys back from Afghanistan, monitoring who they talk to, see that they are curious about how to make bombs, how to encrypt your communications, etc, and write an article saying "oh look, the FBI thinkgs that…

That would be true if prosecution have shown evidences of criminal activities on the side of protecting their privacy.

But they didn't.

That's the red flag.

Re: French govt. says users of uBlock Origin, Signal etc. are potential terrorists

#290

Post by lloeki »

JW_00000 wrote: post #248
junon wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's interesting. So even if the judge knows their ruling could be the worst of several options, they're boxed into doing so because it's the law?

Isn't that always the case when you have rule of law and separation of powers? The legislative body comes up with the law; judges just apply it. E.g. if the law says "murder carries a penalty of minimum 5 years and maximum 30 years imprisonment", then a judge cannot give a sentence of 4 year or of 40 years, even if they personally believe this to be a "better" sentence.

My understanding of the US system design is that the law as defined by the legislative body is in a way "minimalistic" (and even more so at the federal level), and jurisprudence augments it with the details.

Taking your example, what constitutes murder and minimum and maximum penalty are defined in "broad strokes", and the judge gets to define "in this specific case that person is guilty in a way where they should be sentenced to X years", and that becomes law (IIUC scoped to their jurisdiction), progressively refining and tuning the whole system, because the next judge faced with a similar enough case would be bound by it. The lawyer game is then to argue whether the current case is close enough to a previous one for the previous ruling to match (and thus tying the judge's hands). A thoughtful US judge would consider both the case at hand and the implications of being law-generating when issuing a ruling.

Post reply on HN