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

How a French judge was digitally cut off by the USA

heise.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 585 posts

Re: How a French judge was digitally cut off by the USA

#91

Post by JeremyNT »

enlguy wrote: post #3

Only the U.S. would actually sanction someone for trying to indict a war criminal.

> Only the U.S. would actually sanction someone for trying to indict a war criminal.

The problem is that only the US has the power to material harm people to such a degree by doing so.

The amount of control that Big Tech has consolidated into a handful of US megacorporations is a massive danger to the entire world. The US devolving into an overt kleptocracy is a huge threat to freedom everywhere. Who can push back? Obviously not China or Russia, where the problems are even worse.

Of all the wealthy world, the EU basically stands alone as the only entity that has strong enough democratic institutions, capital, and expertise to plausibly develop some kind of alternative.

Re: How a French judge was digitally cut off by the USA

#92

Post by zidad »

7952 wrote: post #25
prasadjoglekar wrote: post #11

TLDR: he's a member of the ICC. Issues warrants against Israeli political leaders. Neither Israel nor the USA (nor China, Russia, India) are parties to the international conventions that formed the ICC. He's being sanctioned as a result by the USA, which flowed down to US companies who must follow US law.

The ICC could be considered to have jurisdiction over Gaza though. Although obviously that is debatable.

It is not debatable. Palestine is a recognized member so according to the law they have jurisdiction. If these laws have any usefulness if no one will follow it is debatable though.

Re: How a French judge was digitally cut off by the USA

#93

Post by Stranger43 »

The reluctance of the EU leadership to so anything materially significant about anything they claim to care about is kind of telling.

It's either that the leadership is so caught up in their own ivory tower bubble of pure rhetoric to realize they havent really put in the logistics to actually affect reality or that they somehow don't really want the consequences of actually changing things.

For this is pretty clear what they need to do to create any real digital sovereignty and yet the seem to not really be willing to take the obvious step of just banning the use of any technology that have any dependency of foreign owned/managed cloud services or closed source products, and ordering their technical staff to start making changes even if it makes stakeholders annoyed, and yet the keep letting companies like IBM/RedHat and Microsoft pretend they can and should be a part of the digital sovereignty transformation project.

We saw the same when safe harbour collapsed and with the cookie directive where rather then doing something effective they found some way to fix it by changing a few words in an mostly unenforced set of click wrap contracts/licenses. .

Re: How a French judge was digitally cut off by the USA

#94

Post by naasking »

Eddy_Viscosity2 wrote: post #4
enlguy wrote: post #3

Only the U.S. would actually sanction someone for trying to indict a war criminal.

I don't think that's true. Lots of countries out there led by thugs. It used to be that the US stood out because it took the law seriously and believed in its ideals to do the right thing (not that it always succeeded, but it did its best). Looks like that time has passed.

> It used to be that the US stood out because it took the law seriously and believed in its ideals to do the right thing

You're in a bubble.

Re: How a French judge was digitally cut off by the USA

#95

Post by anal_reactor »

petcat wrote: post #24
nmridul wrote: post #6

> ..... he calls on the EU to activate an existing blocking regulation (Regulation (EC) No 2271/96) for the International Criminal Court, which prevents third countries like the USA from enforcing sanctions in the EU. EU companies would then no longer be allowed to comply with US sanctions if they violate EU interests. Companies that violate this would then be liable for damages. That is from that article..

EU is in a very tough spot right now. They're getting squeezed on all sides economically by USA and China while simultaneously facing a Russian invasion on their eastern borders. The relationship with the American administration has deteriorated badly and any action seen as "retaliation", such as this policy blockade, would almost definitely result in USA withdrawing even more support for Ukraine in the war. I think,…

>and China

That's the biggest question of the century. Imagine that EU and China make a deal, and they backstab US and Russia respectively. EU and China are physically so far away from each other that there's no way they'd actually run into direct conflict, meanwhile by backstabbing, both of them could easily get what they want. What I'm trying to say is that if you flipped the alliances and aligned EU with China and US with Russia, Russia would collapse within one battle maximum while EU's support would be just enough to push the 50/50 chance of Taiwan invasion towards decisive Chinese victory. Everyone happy - China becomes the world's #1 superpower, while EU remains undisputable #2 and US gets sent back to lick its wounds. Sure, EU might suffer from severing its ties with the US, but if the alternative scenario is US abandoning EU and the latter facing Russia alone, then this stops being such a crazy idea.

Re: How a French judge was digitally cut off by the USA

#96

Post by embedding-shape »

a2tech wrote: post #46
embedding-shape wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It used to be that the US stood out because it took the law seriously and believed in its ideals to do the right thing I think it looked like that, because the US always been very effective at propaganda, and until the internet and the web made it very easy for people to communicate directly with each other without the arms of media conglomerates. It's now clearer than ever that US never really believed in its own…

I’m an American and I can safely vouch that myself and most of the people I know deeply believe in the American ideals that have been presented as gospel for decades—fair play, hard work, rule of law, loving our neighbors (regardless of legal status), and to a one, believe that as soon as you swear your oath at the immigration court, you’re an American, regardless of the circumstances of your birth. The situation we…

> and I can safely vouch that myself and most of the people I know

That's great, too bad none of those people sit in positions of power or anywhere near your government, because from the outside for the last two decades or more, those ideals are not visible to us at all, neither when we look at the foreign policy nor internal.

I'm sure the tides will eventually turn, but we're talking decades more likely than years, since it's been turning this direction for decades already, and I don't see it tipping the balance in the other way even today or the near-future. GLHF at the very least, I do hope things get better for everyone.

Re: How a French judge was digitally cut off by the USA

#97

Post by embedding-shape »

TimorousBestie wrote: post #64
DangitBobby wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm skeptical things would have lasted this long if the "US never really believed in its own ideal or took their own laws seriously". I think you're letting your cynicism for this moment run away with you.

American involvement in the Nuremberg trials set the stage for the modern era of international law. It began with the United States, along with the allied nations, constructing a post-facto legal definition of crime against humanity that somehow included the Holocaust but excluded both the American campaign in Japan and various Russian war crimes on the Western Front. It’s not cynicism to point out the clear hypocris…

Not to mention Jim Crow was still in full effect in the US at the time, but somehow wasn't deemed "Crime against humanity". The winners truly do control the history.

Re: How a French judge was digitally cut off by the USA

#98

Post by vfclists »

Stranger43 wrote: post #93

The reluctance of the EU leadership to so anything materially significant about anything they claim to care about is kind of telling. It's either that the leadership is so caught up in their own ivory tower bubble of pure rhetoric to realize they havent really put in the logistics to actually affect reality or that they somehow don't really want the consequences of actually changing things. For this is pretty clear w…

The EU leadership are a very corrupt group who set themselves up to be open to the highest bidders from day one, and those are mostly US corporations and those of other countries when the US hasn't place sanctions on them.

The antitrust fines they impose on those American companies may simply be regarded as a cost of doing business.

When it comes to being indifferent to the welfare of the general populace, they are just as bad as anything else.

Re: How a French judge was digitally cut off by the USA

#99

Post by embedding-shape »

NooneAtAll3 wrote: post #74
RyJones wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been to Kyiv five times to deliver aid via help99.co, and I've spent many, many hours with Europeans driving trucks from Tallinn to Kyiv. The people volunteering and driving know Europe is at war. They all say nobody else where they live realizes this. It's frustrating.

EU got itself a Cuba too bad that Cuba is right on its own border :)

So literally just like Cuba? The distance between US and Cuba is like 150km, if you're in Donetsk you can't even leave Donetsk Oblast if you travel 150km, and the shortest distance you can take from UkraineRussia to closest EU/NATO member would be something like 600km if you don't take shortcuts via Belarus.

For all intents and purposes, Ukraine's border with Russia is way further away (like magnitude) from EU/NATO than USRussia (who are neighbors) or USCuba (who are also neighbors).

Re: How a French judge was digitally cut off by the USA

#100

Post by watwut »

breppp wrote: post #88
watwut wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither was genocide, neither in outcome nor in intention. You could argue about "mass killing" or some such. Dresden firebombings did not attempted to eliminate German nation as such. It does not matter how actual nazi try to frame it as similar to holocaust, it was not nearly close. And same goes for Hiroshima. It was not an attempt to eliminate Japanese people out of existence.

yes, that is my point. Israeli bombings of Gaza were far more precise and less directed at a civilian population also the population was warned to evacuate in advance, nothing that the germans or japanese had the benefit of

> Israeli bombings of Gaza were far more precise and less directed at a civilian population

They were literally intentionally directed at civilian population. With special focus on healthcare workers. The attempt to starve them was intentional too.

There was even open rhetoric about that.

Post reply on HN