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

Fight Chat Control

fightchatcontrol.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

481–490 of 528 posts

Re: Fight Chat Control

#481

Post by southernplaces7 »

uyzstvqs wrote: post #383
IshKebab wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's pretty common knowledge that pornography is not representative of real relationships, and because it's not actually emotionally satisfying, it takes regular consumers down a rabbit hole of increasingly extreme, vile and obscure content. That's not common knowledge or true. Most of the population watches porn. Where's the harm? > pornography is not representative of real relationships No shit. Next you'll be te…

"In talking to the subjects, researchers discovered that high exposure to pornography videos apparently resulted in lower responsivity and an increased need for more extreme, specialized or “k+++y” material to become aroused."[1] This effect can be clearly seen in that pornography websites promote this extreme, vile and obscure content, such as incest, exhibitionism, and even depictions of non-consensual interaction…

[dead]

Re: Fight Chat Control

#482

Post by croes »

mantas wrote: post #456
croes wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That are alibi changes because the real necessary changes are too unpopular

Then don’t do any changes. Such BS changes are counter-productive and just a waste of resources.

>Then don’t do any changes. Such BS changes

So there are changes

Re: Fight Chat Control

#483

Post by TeMPOraL »

rimunroe wrote: post #437
TeMPOraL wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Maximum term" is a specific legal concept, "at least one year" is the numerical constraint. Or, put another way: if(maxTerm >= 1) { // law implementation OK! }

I don't think their confusion was on how numerical comparisons work, it was on how a "maximum term of imprisonment" could also come with a minimum duration. In other words, what does a "maximum term" mean if it's not the actual longest time someone could be imprisoned for? Are there lesser terms?

Right. The confusion here is that this document isn't setting some maximum term, it's providing a constraints for multiple implementations of the law - it mandates that whatever maximum term any given country chooses, it must be no less than one year.

Re: Fight Chat Control

#484

Post by calgoo »

Svip wrote: post #357
NoboruWataya wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The positive intentional act, I guess, is disseminating the material. Proving intent and various ancillary concepts like knowledge, etc, are the bread and butter of prosecutors, so I don't think the act would be as difficult to enforce as you suggest. Sure, there might be corner cases where you can say "oops I forgot to password protect that Dropbox link" but certainly porn websites that don't do age verification wil…

Which leads to my next questions: What is pornography material? Do drawings qualify? What about text? What about softcore pornography? What about a non-profit outfit? What is the amount of pornography material I need to have for it to be considered disseminating? Someone uploads a few suggestive fan art drawings to my niche bulletin board and now I am liable for a year in jail?

Also, what what methods of sharing? If a 16 year old shares some porn with some friends and it happens to be on a digital system somewhere, can that kids now go to jail for over a year?

Re: Fight Chat Control

#485

Post by moi2388 »

Lasokki wrote: post #453
torginus wrote: post #400

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EU is like: We will protect your sensitive personal documents so that only trusted government institutions and ones held to the highest standards of privacy (such as banks) may have access to it. This is to prevent abuse and identity theft. Also please upload them to BigBootyXXX.com if you want to have a wank

https://ageverification.dev/ "The European Commission is developing a harmonized, EU-wide approach to age verification, accompanied by a comprehensive age verification blueprint that is intended to facilitate practical adoption across all Member States and can be customised to the national context. Built upon the robust European Digital Identity Wallet framework, this user-friendly and privacy-preserving age verifica…

Have you ever played 20 questions?

Re: Fight Chat Control

#486

Post by myaccountonhn »

nickslaughter02 wrote: post #364
myaccountonhn wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No serious way to enact change? That's not true at all.

How exactly are you going to repeal ChatControl or ProtectEU when the same people who lobbied for these proposals/laws are the ones who would have to repeal it? Ursula survived a no confidence vote just a month ago.

It's not over yet. We can still fight it.

I don't think democracy is perfect, especially in this case. But I come from a very regulated country, and have lived in countries with far less regulation. The comfort that comes knowing that my food is somewhat safe to eat, that I have access to healthcare, that most workers have good working condition with lots of holiday. This all came from regulation and democracy, and it's great. I don't think mistrust of institutions and democracy is the way to go.

Re: Fight Chat Control

#487

Post by nickslaughter02 »

myaccountonhn wrote: post #486
nickslaughter02 wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How exactly are you going to repeal ChatControl or ProtectEU when the same people who lobbied for these proposals/laws are the ones who would have to repeal it? Ursula survived a no confidence vote just a month ago.

It's not over yet. We can still fight it. I don't think democracy is perfect, especially in this case. But I come from a very regulated country, and have lived in countries with far less regulation. The comfort that comes knowing that my food is somewhat safe to eat, that I have access to healthcare, that most workers have good working condition with lots of holiday. This all came from regulation and democracy, and i…

It's not over but sorry - they have lost all my trust. With governments like these who needs enemies?

Re: Fight Chat Control

#488

Post by graemep »

FabHK wrote: post #433
graemep wrote: post #394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Unfortunately we have among sex and other things still the mentality of 1900, except that today most 18 year old already lost their virginity, and he can't watch porn? I think there are good arguments for claiming porn is more harmful than actual sex at that age, or at least some types or porn. I agree that if the aim of the legislation was really to stop kids watching porn it would be better served by making it ma…

> I agree that if the aim of the legislation was really to stop kids watching porn it would be better served by making it mandatory for ISPs to provide filtered connections for households with minors and filtered SIM cards for minors. Without thinking about it too deeply, that does sound reasonable. Was that ever discussed? Why was it not, or was rejected?

It was discussed many years ago. ISPs used to offer it. EE, at least, still offers filtered SIM cards.

Its not in wide use, and I think most people do not know its an option and it has no lobby group pushing for it so I am sure politicians do not know about it.

Re: Fight Chat Control

#489

Post by myaccountonhn »

nickslaughter02 wrote: post #487
myaccountonhn wrote: post #486

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not over yet. We can still fight it. I don't think democracy is perfect, especially in this case. But I come from a very regulated country, and have lived in countries with far less regulation. The comfort that comes knowing that my food is somewhat safe to eat, that I have access to healthcare, that most workers have good working condition with lots of holiday. This all came from regulation and democracy, and i…

It's not over but sorry - they have lost all my trust. With governments like these who needs enemies?

There's absolutely reason to lose faith in the system, I'm just as guilty of that. At the same time, it has helped me to know that in many parts of the world there's been slides into authoritarianism, and in cases where there's been strong push-back its been possible to reverse it. It's when there's no push back that it becomes worse.

Objectively, it's still possible to fight it and democracy is still a good venture for making improvements.

Re: Fight Chat Control

#490

Post by huijzer »

freedomben wrote: post #444
sillysaurusx wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the end of the day, "think of the children" has been an ancient rallying cry that’s used to justify all kinds of bad behavior. Often ironic, as you say. Also banks were one of the most vulnerable. I’ve often wondered why. My first reaction is "because their code comes from coders who only want to work at a bank," but I don’t want to be unfair. Perhaps it’s "from people comfortable with lots of bureaucracy". Either…

I consulted with several big banks, and while there are some great developers there, on the whole, the devs were largely passionless and were just there for the job. Many of them actively dislike coding, and it really felt like they were just there for the high pay. I think that type of developer really thrives in a move slow, heavy bureuacracy environment where velocity is not something people care about. The high s…

What I dislike about these large bureaucracies is that it's not only impersonal to the developers who have to work on it, but also for the customers. Even though software is difficult, I think it's a net positive for society to have 10 to 100 banks with poorer software than a few big banks with great software. I think we often overestimate the benefits of economies of scale. A small bank in a town run by a few locals could handle the town's finances perfectly well without much software if there wouldn't be a whole morass of regulations.
Post reply on HN