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

Commission opens formal proceedings against X under the Digital Services Act

ec.europa.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 141 posts

Re: Commission opens formal proceedings against X under the Digital Services Act

#91

Post by actionfromafar »

pjc50 wrote: post #20

Interesting that Community Notes is mentioned, because it's by far the most reliable anti-"disinformation" mechanism I've seen. The "bluecheck" system has been absolutely wrecked, though. Even with the haphazard patching of grey and gold ticks, a bluecheck more often than not is the sign of self-promoted nonsense.

Another amusing thing right now, X marked a journalistic article about Tesla as "spam, misleading or violent":

https://www.expressen.se/nyheter/sverige/x-marker-lank-till-...

Re: Commission opens formal proceedings against X under the Digital Services Act

#92

Post by decremental »

andylynch wrote: post #61
ajsnigrutin wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but can this joke itself be illegal? What law forbids a joke like this? It's not calling for violence, it's not denying the holocaust (just the opposite), it's just.. well.. a joke.

It’s absolutely inciting violence, just using coded language.

[dead]

Re: Commission opens formal proceedings against X under the Digital Services Act

#93

Post by ExoticPearTree »

RandomLensman wrote: post #16
ExoticPearTree wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Nothing EU specific. Most (all?) European countries have a very different view on freedom of speech than the US.

Very EU specific are all the points listed by the EC in their investigation. It cannot get more EU specific than this.

Re: Commission opens formal proceedings against X under the Digital Services Act

#94

Post by Exendroinient23 »

logicchains wrote: post #88
Exendroinient23 wrote: post #83

EU just wants to regulate everything. Recent ai regulations are very bad. Purposefully nerfing yourself at the technology front isn't a solution.

>Purposefully nerfing yourself at the technology front isn't a solution It is a solution if the problem is "preventing anything that could challenge the entrenched elites".

It doesn't have to anything with elites. EU just likes to virtue signal on climate change and new technologies by introducing regulations to keep status quo. Keeping jobs for the sake of only keeping jobs doesn't make any productive sense.

Re: Commission opens formal proceedings against X under the Digital Services Act

#95

Post by jltsiren »

focom wrote: post #26
RandomLensman wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing EU specific. Most (all?) European countries have a very different view on freedom of speech than the US.

"Europe 2.0" aka "the usa" has a better free speech implementation than "Europe 1.0". So yes different as in bad.

I'm not sure the US approach to free speech works that well in practice. Political polarization has become worse in the US than in most other developed countries, and that looks like a consequence of free speech. When you value free speech far above social harmony, you give a lot of power to extremists of all kinds.

Re: Commission opens formal proceedings against X under the Digital Services Act

#96

Post by exceptione »

logicchains wrote: post #84
exceptione wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And about time. The EU (and the US even more so) has been pretty ignorant about the way hostile anti-democratic regimes wage war against free and democratic societies. For dictatorships a misinformation campaign is both way more effective and cheaper than a single Mig fighter jet. This asymmetric war was already a big problem, but the oligarch Musk might have been too loud a siren for the sleepy lawmakers that believ…

[flagged]

Nope. You can have all kinds of criticisms. Please come back to your senses and be your serious, curious and honest self. I can only give you what academics and professionals know about it. I admit that misinformation campaigns are stronger, as they tie you in your own prejudices and fears, on an emotional level.

I will try nonetheless and quote myself here:

"Please realize that the anti-vaccine nonsense is content driven by hostile regimes, ie China and Russia.

I will give you some links:

- https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-china-covid-disinformation-ca...

- https://www.bmj.com/company/newsroom/foreign-disinformation-...

- https://www.politico.eu/article/antivax-conspiracy-lean-pro-... "

Re: Commission opens formal proceedings against X under the Digital Services Act

#97

Post by pseudo0 »

troupo wrote: post #80
kypro wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're critical of X allowing people to recite jokes about the holocaust, how do you feel about Netflix platforming similar jokes about genocides? ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJurYs12ay4 ) Do you feel some jokes are too offensive to be said? Do you feel the EU/UK are correct in their stance that offensive (aka hateful) jokes should be illegal?

"It was just a joke" isn't a legal defence when inciting hatred and violence. It's not legal even in the US (though IANAL). Context matters .

It is legal in the US as long as you are not intending and likely to incite imminent lawless action. Eg. To give a recent example, it's completely legal to chant "from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free" despite some interpreting that chant to be calling for genocide.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/advocacy_of_illegal_action

Re: Commission opens formal proceedings against X under the Digital Services Act

#98

Post by logicchains »

logicchains wrote: post #87
demondemidi wrote: post #68

Disappointing that the vast majority of top levels here are describing the EU as some sort of totalitarian police state. It does respect rights. Do the people in the USA think that every country should let its citizens act like uneducated armed griefers?

>EU as some sort of totalitarian police state Because it (or parts of it) were recently trying to ban private online communication, which is exactly what a totalitarian police state does.

To people downvoting the above, you should inform yourselves better: https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-commission-violation-priv... . The EU Commission has been trying to ban end-to-end encryption, which is functionally equivalent to a ban on private online communication.

Re: Commission opens formal proceedings against X under the Digital Services Act

#99

Post by logicchains »

demondemidi wrote: post #68

Disappointing that the vast majority of top levels here are describing the EU as some sort of totalitarian police state. It does respect rights. Do the people in the USA think that every country should let its citizens act like uneducated armed griefers?

https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-commission-violation-priv... trying to ban end to end encryption is the opposite of respecting rights.

Re: Commission opens formal proceedings against X under the Digital Services Act

#100

Post by the_only_law »

troupo wrote: post #69
speak_plainly wrote: post #53

Liberalism was meant to end this kind of EU censorship. Parliaments were supposed to be the place where diverse and illiberal speech was dissolved into a new liberal language, not through brain dead regulation and technocratism. If Meta properties are the example of what to expect from the future locked-down internet, prepare for the internet and much more to wither on the vine and die a slow and sad death.

> If Meta properties are the example of what to expect Then you see why governments end up regulating them. Not because "liberalism was meant to do something magical"

[flagged]
Post reply on HN