81–90 of 222 posts
Politicians do not care about the ramifications of this. They only care about granting themselves power over who sees what when through the guise of combating hate speech, terrorism, child porn, etc. Posting a blog about this will change nothing.
Politicians do not care about the ramifications of this. They only care about granting themselves power over who sees what when through the guise of combating hate speech, terrorism, child porn, etc. Posting a blog about this will change nothing.
It's the voters will that allows them to use the guise of comabting hate speech, terrorism, child porn etc. Blogging about the negative repercussions of this behaviour help inform the opinions of voters and is exactly what you should do in a democracy.
https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2018/01/trusted-sources/
This is a damned if you do, damned if you don't scenario.
A clever circumvention of innocent until proven guilty - make disobedience carry huge legal risk. You must obey orders (takedown 'requests'), not backed by any court. If you fail, and one turns out to be legitimate, you get punished. Imagine if you had to stop doing business with anyone reported as a thief (but not convicted).
Those who accuse and un-person are the villains throughout history. In the past, people were smeared as sexually loose, as belonging to the "wrong" religion, or as having the "wrong" sexual orientation. In the past, people were smeared as being of the "wrong" racial background. Always be wary of those who smear to enforce their power.
A free society is one, where people and ideas can show up, be given a chance, and stand or fall on their character and merits. Evil is recognizable in its epistemological hazards:
- Don't ask questions.
- Don't read or hear the heretical opinion.
- Don't associate with the "wrong" people.
It's the side of evil which uses vilification, seeks to silence, and uses fear against questions.
Politicians do not care about the ramifications of this. They only care about granting themselves power over who sees what when through the guise of combating hate speech, terrorism, child porn, etc. Posting a blog about this will change nothing.
It’s really hopeless each time one realizes how French and German politicians perceive the internet. For them the internet is not synonymous with the freedom of creativity and expression, but with the freedom to restrain and to control.
About the only thing I can think of is if some big company, think Facebook or Google, lobbied for this because they're large enough that they can actually implement it with review, whereas anyone smaller can't.
Why does the proposed EU legislation have a 1-hour deadline? No matter what you think of the action it's trying to take, a 1-hour deadline is preposterous for anyone and seems expressly designed to force people to set up an automated process that acts on takedown notices without prior review. But who benefits from this? About the only thing I can think of is if some big company, think Facebook or Google, lobbied for…
Its a fruitless effort and very dangerous when misused but thats what I assume they are trying to do anyway.
The EU is a nightmare. Once the UK leaves and people see they are doing better it’s going to start a procession of other countries out the door. Too many regulations and red tape like this make doing business in the EU difficult. I am slightly annoyed every time a cookie banner blocks my view on a website. To think some person in Belgium decided that was a good idea and now everyone online has to deal with it is dist…
When will the UK leave? The latest extension offered to Brexit is until Oct 31. And another extension is likely to be offered then.
The EU is a nightmare. Once the UK leaves and people see they are doing better it’s going to start a procession of other countries out the door. Too many regulations and red tape like this make doing business in the EU difficult. I am slightly annoyed every time a cookie banner blocks my view on a website. To think some person in Belgium decided that was a good idea and now everyone online has to deal with it is dist…
In 18th and even 19th century, Britain's unwritten constitution and notions of "English liberty" did indeed stand out -- and inspired the American to crystalise the ideas into written constitutions.
But 20th century ideologies, and the modern administrative state have "obsoleted" all that. Needless to say Britain coped with the change better than lots of pre-war countries (Germany!).
But post-war, Europeans have put in place formal human rights protections that a working imperfectly, but better than the British non-constitution. British citizens have their basic rights protected in large part because the UK now shares these formal rules with Europe.
Why does the proposed EU legislation have a 1-hour deadline? No matter what you think of the action it's trying to take, a 1-hour deadline is preposterous for anyone and seems expressly designed to force people to set up an automated process that acts on takedown notices without prior review. But who benefits from this? About the only thing I can think of is if some big company, think Facebook or Google, lobbied for…
I think the idea of the 1 hour deadline is to pull it offline before others can download and repost it. The police/governments especially in Australia and New Zealand have worked out that there is simply no way to remove a file from the internet if someone else grabs it in time. Its a fruitless effort and very dangerous when misused but thats what I assume they are trying to do anyway.
I'd say about none.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When will the UK leave? The latest extension offered to Brexit is until Oct 31. And another extension is likely to be offered then.
I feel like, at this point, a possibly likely option is a continued bump of leave dates until the British population gets sick of the BS and forces a stay decision in like 20 years once the old racists go away - but my money is still on UK doing a no-deal brexit because they can't decide on anything else... that will probably happen during the next european recession when the EU gets sick of wasting bureaucratic effo…
The MPs in office overwhelmingly oppose Brexit. They don't support anything else, but they oppose Brexit as well. But the country is fairly evenly divided. However the Conservative party hung itself out to dry on a promise to deliver Brexit, and the Conservative base very strongly wishes that Brexit had happened already. If it doesn't, it is not impossible that the Conservative party will fall apart.
The Conservative leadership's opinion is that their base consist of "swivel-eyed loons", but without that base, the Conservatives don't win elections. Also the Conservatives are in a coalition right now with the DUP, and the DUP is strongly for Brexit. (As I commented to a friend today, if the Conservative base consists of swivel-eyed loons, the DUP base consists of steel-eyed goons.)
The country as a whole is fairly evenly divided. Polls suggest that a re-do would come up Remain. But polls suggested the same thing before the referendum as well. Demographics suggest that the country as a whole will support Remain in the future. However large parts of the country are strongly Leave and that won't be changing any time soon. And no, they aren't simply stupid racists. They have some valid concerns, such as the long-term effect of EU regulations (such as GDPR and the new Copyright bill) on economic growth.