8 ms·

> What’s important to note, though: It’s not “the EU” in general that is to blame – but those who put special interests above fundamental rights who currently h

• buboard 8y ago
  the problem is that the EU doesnt have any internet unicorns being affected by this. So they don't counter-lobby. So whatever small scale online business exists in eu, is screwed.
  • beezischillin 8y ago
    You're right. It was relatively easy for the US to create those companies as it in itself is a huge market with lots of people who, at least, theoretically share a large cultural identity. We don't really have it here so often Germans market to Germans, the people of the UK to the UK, etc. I'm very concerned, especially as the future is involved, that my personal freedoms necessitate billion dollar corporations to lobby in my (and their) best interests. I don't know why I get informed on the issues that I care about and affect me and then go and do my civic duty and vote according to my conscience, then. And that's scary. The US is incredibly lucky to have been founded on an idea that the government is for the people and not vice versa (even though, I will readily admit that the US itself is kind of an imperfect example at the moment, it's the best I see).
    • natermer 8y ago
      Just remember this crap next time anybody spouts bullshit about democracy. It's hard to convince people that the Federal government in the USA is not really democratic in nature because media companies make billions of dollars in revenue off of every election and it's in their interest to propagandize it as much as possible. But in the EU it should be easy to convince people it's just smoke and mirrors and that the central government only represents moneyed interests due to just how far removed it is from any and all oversight by individuals living in the EU. It's a lot more obvious in Europe that even if you got 10 million people to agree with you and sign papers and send letters the central EU government is going to be unaffected and won't really care a whole lot. The only way to cause any change in behavior in government bureaucrats is to impact them directly and individually financially. But since it's illegal to not pay your taxes there isn't much you can do.
      • c3o 8y ago
        Every EU law needs the approval of a majority of directly elected MEPs. They are up for reelection in May. Of course one can influence their behavior.
        • buboard 8y ago
          in theory. eu parliament elections are no different than national elections: they are partisan and considered a gauge of the general elections and usually it becomes a dumping place for former national politicians. there is a huge disconnect between MEPs and citizens of their country. practically only lobby groups can be bothered and have the opportunity to lobby their causes. i have not heard (or told) a single word about gdpr or this new regulation from our MEPs. i very much doubt most of them know what they are voting for
          • Faark 8y ago
            All i read in your post is "citizens don't care". Every democracy will fail if citizens don't care. And I understand its natural to care less about stuff further away. But we need to organize some way how to live together, with democracy least bad option we have. We better make it work somehow.
  • Mirioron 8y ago
    Policies such as GDPR don't help when trying to create an online software business in the EU.
    • ionised 8y ago
      GDPR isn't meant to protect business, it's meant to protect citizens from businesses.
  • smueller1234 8y ago
    So well. There isn't a 700b$ gorilla but Booking.com is Dutch and worth around 80b$, Spotify is apparently good for 26b$ (Stockholm) and Zalando of worth a single digit number of billions (Berlin).
    • buboard 8y ago
      those businesses don't deal with user-uploaded content though.
      • smueller1234 8y ago
        Sure they do. Booking has reviews and user uploaded pictures (the latter is somewhat limited though). But indeed, it's not Instagram.
• pdonis 8y ago
  > It’s not “the EU” in general that is to blame – but those who put special interests above fundamental rights who currently hold considerable power. While I agree with the author's point that the latter category--those who put special interests above fundamental rights--includes the far right as well as the far left, I have to disagree that "it's not the EU in general that is to blame". The problem is that the EU in general is set up to allow this sort of thing to take place. Yes, in this particular case it has bubbled up to visibility early enough to give people a chance to try to convince their representatives to say no. But how many other things are going on behind closed doors that don't get publicized? How many other special interests are being put above fundamental rights without public knowledge? If a government is so untrustworthy that citizens have to constantly micromanage what it does to avoid having their rights taken away, what's the point of having the government in the first place?
  • c3o 8y ago
    Nationalism is the problem behind that, not the solution for it: Legislative processes in the EU are woefully under-covered by the press. That's because newspapers have offices full of reporters to work on national political stories, yet send only one person to Brussels to cover all issues there. (That in turn is one factor leading to EU political jobs being way less glamorous and desired, which in turn has an effect on who even gets sent there in the first place, etc.) It's no wonder that when everyone's horizons end at their national borders the supra-national body will operate under too little scrutiny. We need to start thinking European – the alternative, going back to trying to regulate things like the internet in 28 different ways on a single continent, is just not a reasonable option.
    • ivan_gammel 8y ago
      In this case the press itself is the special interest group. Publishers are trying to protect their content by dropping A-bomb on a pest.
    • CharlesColeman 8y ago
      > Legislative processes in the EU are woefully under-covered by the press. That's because newspapers have offices full of reporters to work on national political stories, yet send only one person to Brussels to cover all issues there. Do actual EU citizens want the important legislation to happen at the national or EU level? I'm not from Europe, but one of the weird things about the EU is that sometimes it seems to be trying to be a state and a not-state at the same time.
• chatmasta 8y ago
  > Call me crazy, but this does sound like... This comment reveals what the current social climate is most lacking: open-mindedness and the willingness to consider the nuance of an argument before labeling the person giving it as a villain. For every opinion someone has, they have to qualify it and proclaim allegiance to the in-group, lest their opinion be stripped of nuance in an effort to ascribe that person to the out-group. The end result is a gradual dulling of social discourse amongst an increasingly, inevitably polarized electorate.
  • freehunter 8y ago
    I agree, but it's a bit necessary online. Psuedo-anonymity means no one really knows who you are or what you believe. You could be trolling. You could be sarcastic. You could be serious. There's tons of bad actors who seek to sow discord or steer a conversation through subtle manipulation, and it works. It doesn't even have to be politics: for the longest time here saying something negative about Rails was a death sentence for your comment score. These days suggesting Rails as an answer might have that effect. And it doesn't even have to be an entire group: some threads commenting positively about Android will bring the wrath of the people. Other threads draw a pro-iPhone crowd. If someone mentions they're excited about the new Samsung phone and I say "yeah but isn't Android known for a malware problem?" how does anyone know if I'm seriously asking a question, if I'm trolling, or even more effective: if I'm spreading FUD by just putting the tiniest little bug in someone's ear? Someone who might see that statement enough times to say "I don't know if that's true, but a lot of people are saying it", and then they repeat it and the snowball keeps rolling. The only way to survive in that world is to wear your allegiance on your sleeve. "I use Android, but even I've had a couple of malware issues". But now that's being co-opted too, so you have to go deeper sometimes. "I've used Android since it came out and I hate iPhone and would never use an Apple product but Google should do more about the malware issue". Forums are weaponized now. By nations, by corporations, by interest groups of all shapes and sizes and means and goals. If something is the least bit controversial, you have no way of knowing what the person (if it was a person) actually meant by it. Which leads to people going out of their way to convince you of their sincerity. Rarely will you find this happening in the real world, unless there is a serious threat that the person's comments might be taken out of context and put on the Internet for judgement.
• petre 8y ago
  Britain is on their way out, so expect more of this Franco-German special interests BS. The far right has only supported the special interest groups. If this law is passed, it is with their full support. Keep that in mind when you vote in the upcoming EP elections. Hardliners will always support restrictive laws and regulations further eroding your rights and your freedoms up to the point where you become a prisoner in your own country.
• nkkollaw 8y ago
  May is near.
• microcolonel 8y ago
  > “Call me crazy, but this does sound like what the "anti-EU far right" takes issue with, more specifically the French-German political control of Europe, beholden to their financial interests. Now I'm not advocating for joining their side, against the EU, by any measure, but it seems to me that people should heed this warning and draw some sensible conclusions in time --- before they find themselves between two terrible extremes and no reasonable way out.” The ease with which people who show any sympathy to the idea that centralization of power in Europe has negative consequences are cowed by smears of "far right" this and "reactionary" that is precisely how the centralizers are winning. The point of the EU is to centralize political power in Europe, and the way they've gotten to this point is by obscuring that aim just enough that they aren't rejected. You can see the purpose of the EU in the calls by the French and German true leaders of the EU to raise a transnational army, the only practical purpose of which would be to police the member states and wage unpopular wars with people who are not the enemies of any member state (otherwise they are clearly doing fine with separate but cooperative military command).
• retromario 8y ago
  > Call me crazy, but this does sound like what the "anti-EU far right" takes issue with, more specifically the French-German political control of Europe, beholden to their financial interests. The irony is that the "anti-EU far right" has helped pushed through this terrible law package. As mentioned in the article (emphasis mine): > the anti-EU far right is trying to seize this opportunity to promote their narrow-minded nationalist agenda – when in fact without the persistent support of the far-right ENF Group (dominated by the Rassemblement/Front National) the law could have been stopped in the crucial Legal Affairs Committee and in general would not be as extreme as it is today. The upcoming May EU elections will play a critical role in the future of the EU (and perhaps this law package). Please vote.
  • krageon 8y ago
    It is the populists (which is what they are) core gambit to yell about something everyone thinks is bad and then just use that support to do whatever they want. If at this point in history we as human beings still cannot recognise this core tenet of how they operate we deserve what's coming to us.
    • chosenbreed37 8y ago
      > It is the populists (which is what they are) core gambit to yell about something everyone thinks is bad and then just use that support to do whatever they want. If at this point in history we as human beings still cannot recognise this core tenet of how they operate we deserve what's coming to us. The mention of the word "populist" always puts me in a state of mild amusement coupled with a slight bewilderment. This word seems to have come into the public discourse relatively recently. Perhaps it's been there all along and I wasn't paying attention. More to the point I don't quite get what it means. It generally has a negative connotation associated with regardless of the context (e.g. Italy, Brazil, France, UK, etc). I consider the HN crowd to be enlightened. Perhaps someone can explain it to me in simple terms what exactly is meant by the word populist.
      • Radim 8y ago
• pmlnr 8y ago
  It's the people in the EU to blame for voting the MEPs they voted.
  • deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  • davidhbolton 8y ago
    MEPs can only vote for/against legislation and if you've seen the videos posted on Youtube by an MEP two or three months back, it's a pretty rushed and not what I'd call rigorous process. We did not vote in the EU commisioners who are the only ones who can initiate legislation, nor can we vote to get rid of them.
    • pmlnr 8y ago
      > We did not vote in the EU commisioners who are the only ones who can initiate legislation, nor can we vote to get rid of them. And that is fine, because bad laws, in theory, can be stopped by those who we did vote for. The unfortunately scenario when both groups are mainly from the same interest groups, which very much looks like the case now; these two groups - commissioners vs MEPs - should always be opposition to eachother for this to work.
• pcstl 8y ago
  It’s important for journalists to do everything in their power to disavow any notion that they might consider anything marginally right of center to not be the work of Satan himself, lest they find themselves out of a job.