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

German government comes out against Chat Control

xcancel.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

521–530 of 578 posts

Re: German government comes out against Chat Control

#521

Post by lmf4lol »

lukan wrote: post #516
lmf4lol wrote: post #515

Earlier quoted context omitted.

they also don’t claim the last thing.

" https://netzpolitik.org/2025/verdachtsfall-rechtsextremismus... " Then maybe read again. "Der Verfassungsschutz belegt Bestrebungen gegen das Demokratieprinzip in der AfD. Auf allen Ebenen der Partei wird demnach die demokratische Nachkriegsentwicklung der Bundesrepublik diffamiert sowie der Staat und die Parteien verunglimpft. „Gewichtigen Teilen der Partei“ geht es „nicht mehr um eine scharfe kritische Auseinande…

this is your reading my friend. in your whole quote, there is no mentioning of the word “fascist”.

also nothing about “violent takeover”. if you take those statements to mean that, then what is Antifa doing? Or XR? Or the pro-pallies?

ah right. only radical left is allowed to use “violence”, right?

Re: German government comes out against Chat Control

#522

Post by dns_snek »

zahlman wrote: post #484
brazukadev wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This sentence does not apply because a "social market economy" does not forbid the generation of profits. Profits are to be shared with the populace to pay for social policies, which is happening. Sure. But that is as socialist as it was the National Socialist German Workers Party.

The continued reference to "socialism" here is a strawman. The discussion started with pembrook's complaint https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45512714 and then had selfmodruntime explaining how the system works starting with https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45513552 . At no point did either person describe the system as "socialism". selfmodruntime was even explicit in referring to "'Social market economy'... a…

> At no point did either person describe the system as "socialism"

> What you, mfru and dns_snek did here is not respectful, open-minded discourse

Give me a break, the original complaint, the one you linked but apparently didn't read, went even further, likening the European economy to communism:

> The USSR was supposed to be a cautionary tale. Not a guidebook!

Re: German government comes out against Chat Control

#523

Post by lukan »

lmf4lol wrote: post #521
lukan wrote: post #516

Earlier quoted context omitted.

" https://netzpolitik.org/2025/verdachtsfall-rechtsextremismus... " Then maybe read again. "Der Verfassungsschutz belegt Bestrebungen gegen das Demokratieprinzip in der AfD. Auf allen Ebenen der Partei wird demnach die demokratische Nachkriegsentwicklung der Bundesrepublik diffamiert sowie der Staat und die Parteien verunglimpft. „Gewichtigen Teilen der Partei“ geht es „nicht mehr um eine scharfe kritische Auseinande…

this is your reading my friend. in your whole quote, there is no mentioning of the word “fascist”. also nothing about “violent takeover”. if you take those statements to mean that, then what is Antifa doing? Or XR? Or the pro-pallies? ah right. only radical left is allowed to use “violence”, right?

So .. you are saying because modern fascists seldom use the term fascist for themself, they ain't no fascist?

Well, to me it is enough if people subscribe openly to all the main ideology of Hitlers party and that time in general.

If it quacks like a duck, walks like a duck and swims like a duck, it is a duck.

Höcke can be officially called a Fascist due to his statements. Was he removed from the party? Or shunned even a little?

Not as far as I am aware.

If a party negates the democratic foundations of the state they are - they do, see the quotes

If they connect with people and organisations who openly call for the nationalistic revolution - they do, see the quotes.

And if the Verfassungsschutz collects all that and labels them "largely radical right extremism" .. then it say exactly what I was saying. Preparation for a violent uprising. Just not in immediate action, otherwise they would be forbidden.

Re: German government comes out against Chat Control

#524

Post by dns_snek »

selfmodruntime wrote: post #476
kharak wrote: post #441

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure why you are downvoted. Social market economy is the self-description in Germany, it's what you learn in school and how German politicians name the system. The goal of social market economy is to 'correct undesirable effects' of free markets. Depending on your perspective, you categorize it as capitalist, socialist or in-between system.

> Not sure why you are downvoted. Because the reality of this is unpopular for critics of capitalism. Most people rarely have an idea how far removed from laissez faire capitalism European countries are. This doesn't stop critics from ironically mentioning that free markets altogether don't work for example in our renter's market (which is the most restricted market we have). The ill-effects we are now feeling are fr…

> Because the reality of this is unpopular for critics of capitalism. Most people rarely have an idea how far removed from laissez faire capitalism European countries are.

No, it's because you keep strawmanning like this for rhetorical effect. Laissez faire capitalism isn't the only form of capitalism that exists and nobody has claimed it to be the form of capitalism that applies to Germany.

Re: German government comes out against Chat Control

#525

Post by fakedang »

AdamN wrote: post #354
angry_octet wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

- All your fellow citizens keep voting for said welfare state/pension system (which is undoubtedly pro-Boomer and has unsustainably low retirement ages and large benefits). - The lack of energy security is because the Red/Greens convinced everywhere except France (go Framatome!) to give up nuclear. I wonder why resource rich Russia would push such an outcome... - Europe needs to spend its savings to get nuclear going…

The nuclear energy thing is a lark. The German nuclear base was already old and minimal by the time those decisions were made (unless you're talking about Greens in the 90s - but they barely had any power). Fundamentally Fukushima happened and Merkel realized that the blast radius of full sized nuclear plants is too big for Germany and there's no expectation that Germany has better controls than Japan had. Anyway, nu…

Merkel is like the Caracalla of modern-day EU. Responsible for 3 of the biggest crises that the union is currently facing today. I do not know why people give a damn about that hag when all she did was stand up to Trump and laugh at him (while cozying up to Putin who threatened her with a dog, literally).

Re: German government comes out against Chat Control

#526

Post by fakedang »

onli wrote: post #313
angry_octet wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

- All your fellow citizens keep voting for said welfare state/pension system (which is undoubtedly pro-Boomer and has unsustainably low retirement ages and large benefits). - The lack of energy security is because the Red/Greens convinced everywhere except France (go Framatome!) to give up nuclear. I wonder why resource rich Russia would push such an outcome... - Europe needs to spend its savings to get nuclear going…

Nuclear energy is very expensive and does not necessarily provide energy security. You just have to check on the energy usage in France during the summer, when the nuclear power plants had to be shut down repeatedly now. Pushing nuclear power would neither provide reliable nor cheap energy. The route forward is solar, hydro, wind and batteries.

Nuclear is cheap if you still have the expertise to make plants cheaply. Countries like Korea, India and China are rapidly expanding nuclear power plants, building them in the range of $2-5 billion dollars, while a smaller-sized plant in the West would set the books back by at least $5 billion. Korea is even winning bids internationally to build powerplants - first they won the bid to build the UAE's first powerplant, and more recently they won the bid to build another large powerplant in Czechia.

Re: German government comes out against Chat Control

#527

Post by kharak »

deaux wrote: post #505
selfmodruntime wrote: post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Even public libraries aren't free! Because they aren't public. They are provided by a company. > And let's not mention the health care system, which literally has two tiers, one for the poor and one for the rich, with of course the poor-tier being barely functional, and still expensive as fuck This is because of inefficiency, an aging demographic and regulation, not because of capitalism. The "system for the rich"…

> This is because of inefficiency, an aging demographic and regulation, not because of capitalism. The Korean healthcare system has a much worse aging demographic as well tons of regulations, being nothing like e.g. the US. Yet in terms of "system for the poor" the difference with Germany could hardly be bigger. To blame it on those is straight up wrong, in that it's an oversimplification of a complex topic to such a…

Could you elaborate on the differences in the healthcare systems?

Re: German government comes out against Chat Control

#528

Post by avianlyric »

FirmwareBurner wrote: post #456
avianlyric wrote: post #454

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Your primary citizenship gained via by birth or by descent cannot be taken away from you almost anywhere. I’m sorry but you’re badly misinformed here. There is no concept of “primary citizenship”, you’re either a citizen or you’re not. If your government has a right to strip your citizenship, then mechanism by which you acquired citizenship is relevant. The whole point of citizenship is to declare that everyone wit…

No, it is you who are misinformed. According to your Wikipedia link she was a dual citizen so the UK had the legal rights to strip her of her British one and she was left with her Bangladeshi citizenship, so not stateless. >However, the UK government contended that Begum was a dual national, also holding citizenship of Bangladesh, and was not therefore made stateless by the decision. >However, the Special Immigration…

She was born in the UK as a UK citizens to parents that were naturalised UK citizens. By your definition her “primary” citizenship was British. That was where she was born, that was where she grew up, that was the first citizenship she gained.

Due to her parent Bangladeshi origins, she had a separate right to claim Bangladeshi citizenship, but at the point she lost her British citizenship had not claim that right. She has also never lived in Bangladesh, and has never held a Bangladeshi passport.

At the time UK was going to remove her citizenship, Bangladesh said the following:

> The Government of Bangladesh stated that Begum did not currently hold Bangladeshi citizenship and, without it, would not be allowed to enter Bangladesh.

You’ve made some pretty silly claims about countries not removing people’s “primary” citizenship. Begum is quite clearly a case where their “primary” citizenship based on the parameters you provided, was her British citizenship, and the UK has quite clearly stripped her of that citizenship. Bangladesh has also refused to acknowledge her as a citizen, which seems a lot fair that the UKs stance, given she’s never lived, worked, or paid taxes in Bangladesh, so it not clear why they should be responsible for her, rather than the country where she was born and raised.

Re: German government comes out against Chat Control

#529

Post by Xelbair »

the_gipsy wrote: post #494
Xelbair wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

majority in 2, due to worsening economic situation over the years and total disappointment in current options with no other option to break this impasse than to throw hand grenade into the mix. exactly one person in first group - a genuine belief in efficiency of authoritarian system from someone on spectrum. I also love how you neatly divided whole political spectrum into two, and bundled a lot of options into 'bad'…

Let's remove "anti green" and "anti immigration" (but not pure xenophobia) out of group 1, since you seem to protest those two as the most ambiguous (I do agree that those areas may be too blurry). I also think you misinterpreted "authoritarianism for their group", or I expressed it poorly. I don't mean "support of authoritarian governments", but rather "give more power to their group over others, or favor keeping su…

so you've made up your mind beforehand, and will never change your views on any of this.

why you even do you bother to keep arguing in bad faith?

Re: German government comes out against Chat Control

#530

Post by the_gipsy »

FirmwareBurner wrote: post #517
the_gipsy wrote: post #339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Taking citizenship away from those who voluntarily join terrorist organizations like ISIS? 100% agree with this, how could you not? Sounds great on paper, until it starts happening to X, which is your group, now suddenly a terrorist organization, and you happened to have joined in their view.

>until it starts happening to X, which is your group, With that logic we shouldn't ever punish or jail criminals because you too might be a criminal one day.

No, by my logic we shouldn't take citizenship away, period. How can you be so dense?
Post reply on HN