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

European Parliament approves copyright reform

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 840 posts

Re: European Parliament approves copyright reform

#431

Post by gph »

paganel wrote: post #130

> France’s current batch of national politicians have consistently advocated for the worst parts of the Directive, and the Macron administration may seek to grab an early win for the country’s media establishment. Macron is a crook. If any other president from any other civilized country would have sent the military to guard against its citizens' street protests [1] then that president would have been (rightly) calle…

I mean they deployed the National Guard in Baltimore after the first day of Freddie Gray protests. There was some burning and looting going on, so it got labeled a 'riot', but honestly what's been going on in Paris has probably been worse.

Re: European Parliament approves copyright reform

#432

Post by selimthegrim »

nicc wrote: post #294
selimthegrim wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does his personal life have to do with the point you’re making? Why is it that right wingers want it both ways - Tucker Carlson thinks it’s not a big deal and presumably you don’t too until the male involved grows up and actually holds power.

> What does his personal life have to do with the point you’re making? For the leader of a country, character is important. If I was French it would definitely worry me that my president dated his 40-year-old high school teacher when he was 16, and married a woman 25 years older than him. Not the average Frenchman--which was my point. > Why is it that right wingers want it both ways - Tucker Carlson thinks it’s not a…

Can you spell out what about it worries you?

As for Carlson: https://jezebel.com/tucker-carlson-seems-to-have-a-lot-of-fu...

Re: European Parliament approves copyright reform

#434

Post by marcodave »

fock wrote: post #186
hektorrr wrote: post #82

This is also huge blow in the artist community, because if they will have no license or contract with big media entities their work will not be shared. And I hope Google, MS and Wiki will stick together in blocking any content from entities requiring any sort of pay. Of course this would not solve all issues featured with these reforms. Smallest are always loosing when it comes to laws like that.

You can still share on your personal site (even your commercial one, as you won't violate copyright I guess and so can't be sued effectively (if local legislation would get their shit together even not in the typical extortion form))... Random, unaccounted internet fame by the magic of some proprietary algorithm might be harder too achieve though, but I see no censorship in this (and indeed today, censorship is possi…

> Random, unaccounted internet fame by the magic of some proprietary algorithm

I'm wondering how much of the current user-created content on those platform is driven by that

Re: European Parliament approves copyright reform

#435

Post by clarkmoody »

It's called counter-revolution.

Many revolutionary movements are eventually co-opted by elites (often the elites of the overthrown system) for their own purposes. Sometimes the new system put in place after the counter-revolution is worse than the system the original revolution sought to overthrow.

The cypherpunks foresaw the dystopian surveillance state decades before the reality and tried to get out in front of it via cryptography. But the raw economics of central service network effects completely destroyed a distributed, control-your-own-keys world. Going forward there are always proposals for a state-controlled "third-key" on all encryption.

Likewise, the gatekeepers of the old system (record labels, Disney, etc), have always used the state to enrich themselves. The Internet caught them off guard and they tried to fight it in the early 2000s with lawsuits for file sharing, which hurt their public image greatly. But centralized services came to dominate distribution once again. And now we're seeing obvious self-enrichment with these "reforms."

Re: European Parliament approves copyright reform

#436

Post by chli »

montenegrohugo wrote: post #241

A big part of the problem is that there is no single entity that defends the citizens interest in this instance. You have the Disney's of the world heavily lobbying to pass reforms like these, but who protests against it? - Online signatures? Gets laughed out of the room. They could be fake, they don't mean anything, they are paid, etc.. - Voting? Voting cycles are too long and voting decisions cannot be made on a si…

There is that:

https://www.ch.ch/en/demokratie/political-rights/referendum/

I consider myself lucky !

Re: European Parliament approves copyright reform

#437

Post by golergka »

rmind wrote: post #301
golergka wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could vote for your country to exit EU.

It is not the EU which is the problem. It is the reluctance of the political establishment (both within the countries and across the EU) to acknowledge the opposition to such laws.

With structures such as EU, the distance between the voter and decision-making center gets longer, and voter's influence smaller. Exiting these structures, just as limiting the power of any central or federal government in favour of moving this power to lower-level elected authorities (such as states in US or Russia) decreases this distance.

Re: European Parliament approves copyright reform

#438

Post by moate »

tremon wrote: post #426
moate wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, but the problem is often the 'lesser of two evils' voting options. There's no choice present for me that I feel represents what I want/need in an elected official. I'm not voting for what I want, I'm just making sure that what I loathe doesn't get into office. This is the problem with representative democracy; it assumes there's a good proxy for my voice, and there increasingly isn't

This is where party-based politics fails representative democracy. There are supposed to be N voices in parliament, so that at least N different voices can be heard. Large parties, party discipline and backroom deals are (imnsho) fundamentally at odds with a well-functioning representative democracy.

It's a feature, not a bug. As much as people want strong individuals as representatives, time has shown over and over again that a well oiled machine (party) will be much stronger. Those parties then create rules that reinforce the need for coalitions and weaken individuals.

Representative democracy is meant to be a way to mitigate the problem of true democracy, which is the idea that it's easier to build a consensus among a small group than a large one and also that "the unwashed masses don't know what's actually good for them".

Bottom line is that it's impossible for 1 person to serve as a uncompromising proxy for a large group of people on multiple issues. Even if there weren't parties, there would be a point where my 95% agreement representative gets into the 5% of issues where we disagree. And no matter what, that's going to feel bad man.

Re: European Parliament approves copyright reform

#439

Post by tremon »

bad_user wrote: post #139
DarkWiiPlayer wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To make my point a bit clearer: I am almost convinced now that "representative democracy" shouldn't count as a "democracy" just because the population can vote who they get ####ed by. It only works as long as the representatives see it as their duty to represent the will of the voters accurately, which I'm starting to believe is an antithesis to human behavior, and thus will never be the norm. I'm not saying that Eur…

Sorry, but the Brexit referendum is the perfect example of choices that should not be made directly by the population, because it lacks the competence to foresee the effects or even to distinguish fact from fiction. If you told UK citizens that the choice is in fact for a No Deal Brexit and what that will mean, they wouldn't have voted for Brexit. However the population was lied to about the economic benefits and vot…

the Brexit referendum is the perfect example of choices that should not be made directly by the population

I disagree. I think this is exactly the kind of question that lends itself well for a public referendum. The problem with Brexit in particular was its execution, not its premise.

For one, the people were given only a binary choice. As is clear by now (and many people knew that before), there are more than two options on the table: it is about in or out of the EU, the EEA, the ECJ, the EUCU, and about the laws underpinning the GFA. Secondly, the entire referendum was strung together haphazardly because the government didn't think it could lose, so none of the campaigners (let alone the public) knew what they were arguing for. And because of that ill-defined question, we still see major division among parliament about what people actually voted for. Lastly, the entire campaign was hijacked by xenophobic tendencies that only distracted from the main question.

Re: European Parliament approves copyright reform

#440

Post by lisper »

This is just one skirmish in an on-going war between democracy and capitalism. Right now capitalism is winning, in no small measure because very few people seem to realize that this war is even happening. Most people, especially in the U.S., think that democracy and capitalism are inherently compatible with each other, as if the principles of "one person one vote" and "one dollar one vote" are not mutually antagonistic or can somehow be reconciled. Corporations, of course, are only too happy to allow this misconception to flourish.
Post reply on HN