Personally I think the EU goes too far when I'm not even allowed to access books on the internet where the author died more than 100 years ago. So I like it xD
which books?
US plans online portal to bypass content bans in Europe and elsewhere
391–400 of 1001 posts
Re: US plans online portal to bypass content bans in Europe and elsewhere
#392This comes across not as some noble to support free speech and more an attempt to exempt US firms like Grok, Meta, etc. from laws banning AI generated child porn and deliberately addicting social media.
Re: US plans online portal to bypass content bans in Europe and elsewhere
#393Earlier quoted context omitted.
According to Reuters, it will essentially be a free VPN. https://www.reuters.com/world/us-plans-online-portal-bypass-...
So you're not paying for it? In corporate america how is that going to be moneytized?
it would be extremely naive to believe that certain corporations allied with the regime wouldn’t have complete, entire, total access to all of the traffic to feed their data collction.
Re: US plans online portal to bypass content bans in Europe and elsewhere
#394Re: US plans online portal to bypass content bans in Europe and elsewhere
#395Earlier quoted context omitted.
Trade and tarriff relief are an option still. Despite how shitty the US has been and the distrust that will cause in the future access to US markets will be very attractive until the economy collapses. Soft power isn't just from countries liking you after all.
Would be a good reason for the EU to start a 200% tariff for US software and cloud services then.
How would this work? Wouldn't a reciprocal tariff with identical parameters by the US against EU tech companies completely obliterate EU tech landscape?
Re: US plans online portal to bypass content bans in Europe and elsewhere
#396Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would educating people instead and giving them more options for information, not be better than banning access to information?
If educating people worked there wouldn’t be any obese people, or drunkards, or smokers, druggies, gamblers, people addicted to doomscrolling or video games or ragebait "news" or… Education is as useful as preaching abstinence at horny teenagers instead of providing access to contraceptives
Oh my, that is a depressing view on the human condition.
Re: US plans online portal to bypass content bans in Europe and elsewhere
#397Earlier quoted context omitted.
> ethically coherent with American values I'm a lifelong US citizen and burst out laughing at this. What values? What coherence? Do you mean the NSA man-in-the-middleing all that traffic and leaving a backdoor for Mossad? Imagine the most despicable possible invasion of privacy and the most reprehensible shadow oppression and manipulation of an uneducated populace you can conjure up. Now imagine something way worse t…
Freedom of speech. I didn't expect to have to spell it out.
Re: US plans online portal to bypass content bans in Europe and elsewhere
#398Meanwhile, you can't even go on pornhub in certain states in the US, but yes let's let people go on X and engage in hate speech. In fact I'm sure bad actors will use that site FROM the us, to anonymize their hate speech from Russia/China
> let people go on X and engage in hate speech
So interesting to see it become a popular opinion that we should "not let" people say certain things. Like, if necessary, we should jail people for speaking.
I remember learning about the ACLU[1] as a teen, 25 years ago, and how they took a lot of flak for defending people who said things we all agreed were gross, which at first glance seems disgusting. But the lesson we were taught was that the Constitutional guarantee of "freedom of expression" wasn't qualified with "as long as the opinions being expressed are cool ones."
Really, "hate speech" is defined as "any ideas counter to beliefs I hold dearly." Right wingers think some or all porn is the "bad" kind of expression and apparently banworthy, and left wingers think saying pretty much anything about trans ideology (other than full-throated endorsement) is hate speech.
I'm aware that many who are of the "don't let people do 'hate speech'" aren't Americans and don't owe any respect for the ideas of our particular Constitution, and that's fine -- but many Americans also now feel that citizens should only be able to speak the subset of ideas that one party endorses, and that any other ideas should be punishable, as they are in the UK.[2]
[1] If I understand it correctly, I think the ACLU is under new management, and no longer defends anyone whose ideas are uncomfortable.
[2] https://factually.co/fact-checks/justice/uk-arrests-for-twee... This fact-check points out that "only" 10% of the 30 arrests per day for online postings end up with convictions, and that it's rare to have "long" prison sentences. Very comforting.
Re: US plans online portal to bypass content bans in Europe and elsewhere
#399Personally I think the EU goes too far when I'm not even allowed to access books on the internet where the author died more than 100 years ago. So I like it xD
Which book is that?
Re: US plans online portal to bypass content bans in Europe and elsewhere
#400Earlier quoted context omitted.
In general the justice system don't care much what your idea of the law is. If its not clear through the actuall law or the accompanying comments what constitutes hate speech, it will be cleared up by the court itself.
Do you really not understand the sort of slippery slope that presents?
My point is that this is the norm, not the exception in legal systems. It's good for laws to be clear cut and unambiguous, but in practice the world is not, and laws gets interpreted as courts use them.