421–430 of 656 posts
The author says that "the system" will scan data. What "system"? Android? Windows? Linux?
If system means "an application" - how would it come to my OS? Pre-installed? By whom? On Linux??
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So what? If predators cannot talk to children over SnapChat, that's a win, wouldn't you say? The only valid argument I see against ChatControl is that fundamentally, you cannot know what it is reporting. It's not like if there would be an open source list of illegal material together with the hashes, right? If you cannot audit what is being reporting (with whatever means necessary to make sure it is doing what it sho…
> The only valid argument I see against ChatControl is that fundamentally, you cannot know what it is reporting. It's not like if there would be an open source list of illegal material together with the hashes, right? By definition, they must state what is actually illegal, lest I be hidden laws with hidden punishments. And those lists of 'illegal' need to be publicly disclosed, so we are aware. At least in the USA a…
I don't need to murder you in order to say that murdering you is illegal, do I?
Of course they don't have to publish CSAM material in order to say that this is illegal CSAM material. If you could go get CSAM material at your local library, nobody would be talking about scanning it with ChatControl...
Dear citizens of the EU: If this gets pushed through, you will gradually lose control of your government much like how the people of the UK already lost control of theirs. What are you going to do when the government's interests inevitably drift out of alignment with yours? Start a political movement? You will have the police knocking on your door for criticizing the establishment. Start a revolution? You have no wea…
>you will gradually lose control of your government much like how the people of the UK already lost control of theirs. As a UK citizen, can you explain your reasoning here? We haven't implemented anything like the chat control proposal and while a few politicians have brought up similar ideas, there is a lot of pushback against it.
How much do you trust your current government with the extensive surveillance apparatus they have created?
How much do you trust the next government?
What about the government after that?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> but I doubt it will stop the average offender I strongly believe it will catch the average offender. The average human doesn't have a clue about cryptography. It won't catch all of them, of course. My point is that it is invalid to say that it won't catch anyone . > but at what cost? EXACTLY! The problem is that whoever controls the list of illegal material can abuse it. We fundamentally cannot audit the list becau…
"It won't catch all of them, of course. My point is that it is invalid to say that it won't catch anyone." Sure, but wouldn't they quickly learn once people are getting caught?
And predators who get in contact with kids have to do it over social media that the kids use. Those ones would be affected by ChatControl.
Dear citizens of the EU: If this gets pushed through, you will gradually lose control of your government much like how the people of the UK already lost control of theirs. What are you going to do when the government's interests inevitably drift out of alignment with yours? Start a political movement? You will have the police knocking on your door for criticizing the establishment. Start a revolution? You have no wea…
We still have Euros. As long as enough companies and rich folk are more on our side than theirs, the government still has some incentive to serve us.
I know, I know - money and politics, wealth and power, they go together at the high end. But there is the oft forgotten long tail, the rich and powerful at the scale of a city, a neighborhood, a niche market. Those tend to side with communities they live in, and in aggregate they still have plenty of pull with the rulers (which in stable times they use to block all kinds of potentially useful legislation, but still, good to have them come the hard times).
Weapons won't matter all that much anyway, for several reasons:
1) Life, especially in the EU, is not like in an American action movie;
2) Citizens here may be significantly less armed, but the same is true of government officials, and even law enforcement is significantly less armed. It kind of evens out, unless military gets involved, but at that point all bets are off - no different than in the US.
3) Firearms have a habit of magically appearing in bulk the moment a revolution starts. When it happens, it's a good indicator you should GTFO somewhere far away, as you're being played by whoever is supplying the weapons to your side.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Predators use mainstream social media to enter in contact with children.
Most victims of child abuse know their aggressor because it is part of their social circle: dad, mother, uncle, brother, sport coach or a friend of the parents/sibling.
Or are you saying that we should not care about the others?
Dear citizens of the EU: If this gets pushed through, you will gradually lose control of your government much like how the people of the UK already lost control of theirs. What are you going to do when the government's interests inevitably drift out of alignment with yours? Start a political movement? You will have the police knocking on your door for criticizing the establishment. Start a revolution? You have no wea…
What are you on about, mate?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A large portion of the population either does not believe or does not mind the violations of our constitution to achieve their desired outcomes. As an American, it came as a surprise to me that we do not, in fact, have broadly shared values about our system of governance. This year has been a devastating blow to my confidence in our democracy and the ability of people to govern themselves generally.
> As an American, it came as a surprise to me that we do not, in fact, have broadly shared values about our system of governance. It shouldn't, America is two very distinct nations. The shape and nature of those nations vary wildly in classical Baudrilliardian sidewinding progression, but it's rooted in the very early history of British North America. Two distinct primogenitor colonies and societies, Jamestown and Pl…
My question is whether two different cultures can in fact coexist with each other for a single system of governance.
Like, Why do we focus so much on our differences as a species that we forget how much common we are on literally everything.
What is a solution to this problem that's kinda impacting the world right now. America moves in pendulum in a political cycle completely 180'ing but yet at the same time, I feel like no real change is being made against lobbying/corruption which sort of infiltrates the world too.
Bernie sanders and now maybe zohran are the two democrats who are genuinely tryna do something for america which I deeply respect tbh. Yet there wasn't really a way for one to vote for them directly y'know?
Are these differences of cultures really that distinct to basically split a country in half in everything except the borders?
Was there no way of integrating them without having them idk being the way that they are right now?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The accepted solution is to have a constitution that says otherwise. Which is a bit complicated here, as the EU has no real constitution and this 'law' (really a regulation) is a blatant violation of the constitutions of countries that did choose to establish secrecy of correspondence.
I've commented this elsewhere, but rights in the US are generally much more absolute than here in Europe. For example, in the EU you technically have the right to freedom of expression, but you can also be arrested if you say something that could offend someone. Similarly rights to privacy are often ignored whenever a justification can be made that it's appropriate to do so. I don't know about elsewhere in the world,…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exce...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>you will gradually lose control of your government much like how the people of the UK already lost control of theirs. As a UK citizen, can you explain your reasoning here? We haven't implemented anything like the chat control proposal and while a few politicians have brought up similar ideas, there is a lot of pushback against it.
The UK doesn't have the exact equivalent of chat control yet, but it already arrests people for politically incorrect posts. They're doing things in smaller steps, which is more likely to succeed.