5 ms·

> Your government who wants to control you How exactly? In Italy we had 67 different governments since 1946. What can they do with CSAM data? Government can

> Your government who wants to control you How exactly? In Italy we had 67 different governments since 1946. What can they do with CSAM data? Government can't blackmail citizen, they can't use CSAM scans for other purposes, they can't even authorize a scan, because that's the justice system prerogative. Do you really believe that in Europe governments are in control of everything like it happens in Russia or in North Korea? They are as weak as they can be.

newsclues 4y ago
"Do you really believe that in Europe governments are in control of everything like it happens in Russia or in North Korea?" No, but I really believe European leaders are jealous of the authoritarian powers they lack, and are working to resolve that.
- peoplefromibiza 4y ago
  > No, but I really believe European leaders are jealous of the authoritarian powers they lack, and are working to resolve that. You can believe anything you want. That wouldn't make you right. national parliaments have to pass these legislation, EU is formed by 26 countries, all with very different ideas, traditions, political stances and objectives. So, Orban? Yeah he would love to be the sole leader of his country. In my country? those that tried have been destroyed by their same allies, out of fear of having to live in someone else's shadow. If everyone wants to be the one and only leader, nobody will ever be. Opposing forces always balance themselves. Funny that all USA businesses lament that there is too much democracy in EU (like too much democracy is bad!), but now HN says that there is an imminent risk of totalitarianism...
  - newsclues 4y ago
    I’m Canadian, they seized bank accounts and used emergency laws to crush protesters. Democracy is already crumbling. And American has the NSA!
nix23 4y ago
>Government can't blackmail citizen Why not? >Do you really believe that in Europe governments are in control of everything like it happens in Russia or in North Korea? Wait you think Russia is in control of it's citizen? Oh man, western propaganda seams to work even better then the russian counterpart.
- peoplefromibiza 4y ago
  > Why not? Because they can't, the moment they do, they'll be roasted for doing it. Those who tried, failed miserably. Justice system here is not run by governments, it's a completely separated power. > Wait you think Russia is in control of it's citizen? Oh man, western propaganda seams to work even better then the russian counterpart. They control everything in the control rooms, which is not even the case oin EU democracies. Do you really believe EU governments will control every communication over the wire if this law is approved in the 26 EU countries?
  - stjohnswarts 4y ago
    I think the EU wants to go through easy to rummage through stuff like email, texts, instant messenger (all easy to go through if unencrypted). I think that's what their warning shot is. Eventually they would like to put spyware in every app/phone and keep tabs on what you're doing. It's the same in America as well. Politician and the police state have no shame when it comes to wanting to take away your privacy "to think of the children" and "what about terrorists?". There is a reason we have search warrants. It's a compromise that has worked for centuries, and I don't see why that has to go out the door with new technologies.
    - peoplefromibiza 4y ago
      Seriously, if you start with "I think EU is turning into Sauron",you then can imply everything, you'll be mostly wrong though. > I think that's what their warning shot is These arguments have been in discussion for at least a decade. Why do you think they want to read your email? What purpose could it serve? Do you really think France will accept to put the email of their citizens out in the clear if Germany refuses? (nations can still delay the implementation of regulations, technically forever) > There is a reason we have search warrants They are still required. CSAM is only what Apple already does (and that's another reason why I don't buy Apple products).
School-Cotton 4y ago
> In Italy we had 67 different governments since 1946. Colloquially when Americans say “government” they are referring to the entire state, including not just elected officials but professional civil servants, police, courts, intelligence agencies, etc. You have definitely not had 67 different governments since 1946 in the sense that I think was meant.
- peoplefromibiza 4y ago
  > You have definitely not had 67 different governments I've studied English, not American. So government to me means means "the group of people who officially control a country", like in this BBC headline "Netanyahu out as new Israeli government approved". We definitely had 67 governments. Or 67 cabinets, if you prefer. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_prime_ministers_of_Italy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_prime_ministers_of_Ita...
  - vel0city 4y ago
    Its definitely a complicated and messy idea. Many Americans would essentially only consider a complete change of constitution as a "new government", meanwhile in certain language in parliamentary structures there is a common phrase of "creating a new government" when an election takes place. Neither idea is really wrong, they're just coming from different perspectives. If you're using the same kind of terminology, the federal US has had probably 117 governments, as this is the 117th Congress. However, we as Americans don't necessarily consider this a "new government", in that many of the institutions aren't radically different. We still have the Centers of Medicare and Medicaid Services, we still have the FBI, we still have the CIA, we still have the Social Security Administration, we still have the NTSB, we still have the FAA, etc. For Americans, the institutions are a massive part of the identity of "the Federal government", and unless all the institutions change its pretty much seen as a continuous government. Its definitely a messy turn of phrase which means different things in different contexts. Either way, while Italy has had 67 cabinets/governments, I imagine a lot of institutions have stayed the same. The ability for abuse is based in the institutions, the will to abuse is often with the politicians. So its not like a "new government" woudl somehow wipe clean all the record collections and ability for the State to act on it, you just have different people telling people to pull the levers a little different every few years.
lapcat 4y ago
> What can they do with CSAM data? > Government can't blackmail citizen, they can't use CSAM scans for other purposes, they can't even authorize a scan, because that's the justice system prerogative. In the United States, legal blackmail is called a "plea bargain". You agree to admit you're guilty of a crime, even if you aren't, in return for the government not pursuing harsher charges against you. This occurs without trial, because of course the whole point of the plea bargain is to avoid going to trial. Why would an innocent defendant want to avoid trial? Well, good lawyers are extremely expensive, and public defenders are extremely overworked. Also, police will often say whatever they need to say on the stand to get a conviction and justify their arrest. How many cops are ever jailed themselves for perjury?
- eru 4y ago
  Compare 'Torture and Plea Bargaining' https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4154&context=uclrev https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?arti... > In this essay I shall address the modem American system of plea bargaining from a perspective that must appear bizarre, al though I hope to persuade you that it is illuminating. I am going to contrast plea bargaining with the medieval European law of torture. > My thesis is that there are remarkable parallels in origin, in function, and even in specific points of doctrine, between the law of torture and the law of plea bargaining. I shall suggest that these parallels expose some important truths about how criminal justice systems respond when their trial procedures fall into deep disorder.
- wsc981 4y ago
  One way to prevent getting yourself into too much trouble might be to never talk to cops (without a lawyer): https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE
Amezarak 4y ago
In English and particularly American English, “the government” is understood to encompass the justice system as well as Congress/parliament. People are taking about justice system abuses, not just some MP abusing his power. Law enforcement and courts control the country just as much as the parliament. This isn’t some feature of American government either: in the US local law enforcement is often completely divorced from the state and federal political process and is run independently at a local level, with sheriffs and district attorneys even being elected positions in many jurisdictions. There is no national police - the closest thing is the FBI (though there are a few other national law enforcement agencies), but it can go after only crimes involving multi-states or interstate commerce, and at a high level it is run essentially like state law enforcement organizations in other countries, largely independent of the political process, although at the very top it is politically appointed, usually with a career official placed in charge.
- peoplefromibiza 4y ago
  > In English and particularly American English, “the government” is understood to encompass the justice system as well as Congress/parliament That's only because in USA the justice system depend on the elected president and elected representatives of the State. But that's not true in Europe. Law enforcement forces and justice system employees only have to obey to the laws, not to the politicians in power. They can't be fired at will.
  - Amezarak 4y ago
    > That's only because in USA the justice system depend on the elected president and elected representatives of the State. That’s absolutely not true in the US. Almost all law enforcement has no connection to the President whatsoever. The FBI does have a connection, the director is appointed with legislative assent, but FBI employees cannot be fired at will by politician or even the director. Further, the FBI didn’t even exist for most of American history, so that’s not why the term evolved the way it did. Also, your country almost certainly operates similarly to US federal law enforcement. Or are you claiming there’s no democratic oversight of or input into the justice system at all? Further, if you don’t consider the justice system part of the government, what is it?
stjohnswarts 4y ago
I think they would like to be in control of everything and know/document everything they can about every person's life. I understand that makes their job easier, and maybe even they have the best of intentions. But just a couple of weeks a go a racist was running in France (Le Penn) and not too long ago the leader of the free world a known POS, likely criminal, and racist DJT was in office. I don't want any of those people to have free access to any and whatever information that they want. I am thinking of the children and of future generations of them. If we don't stand up for our freedom and privacy we are also not standing for theirs.
hans_castorp 4y ago
> Do you really believe that in Europe governments are in control of everything like it happens in Russia or in North Korea? It certainly feels, as if they are trying to do that.
- peoplefromibiza 4y ago
  > It certainly feels, as if they are trying to do that. Putin's been there for 22 years, Kim is there by rights of birth, in my country the PM has been there for 18 months and it looks like he's not going to last till the natural end of the legislature, in 2023. His career as dictator 4 life looks pretty bleak from my POV.
  - stephen_g 4y ago
    Well I guess that’s where the idea of the “deep state” or “shadow Government” comes from. Obviously I don’t think it’s true to anywhere near the extent that many conspiratorially minded people do, but I think there could be some truth to it, in that there are bureaucrats (especially in intelligence) in many countries who probably do have too much power and too little scrutiny and accountability over what they do, who manage to keep their positions for long periods of time and abuse their positions for various ends and reasons.
rmbyrro 4y ago
Does anyone know whether one can get more naive than that?

newsclues 4y ago

"Do you really believe that in Europe governments are in control of everything like it happens in Russia or in North Korea?" No, but I really believe European leaders are jealous of the authoritarian powers they lack, and are working to resolve that.

peoplefromibiza 4y ago
> No, but I really believe European leaders are jealous of the authoritarian powers they lack, and are working to resolve that. You can believe anything you want. That wouldn't make you right. national parliaments have to pass these legislation, EU is formed by 26 countries, all with very different ideas, traditions, political stances and objectives. So, Orban? Yeah he would love to be the sole leader of his country. In my country? those that tried have been destroyed by their same allies, out of fear of having to live in someone else's shadow. If everyone wants to be the one and only leader, nobody will ever be. Opposing forces always balance themselves. Funny that all USA businesses lament that there is too much democracy in EU (like too much democracy is bad!), but now HN says that there is an imminent risk of totalitarianism...
- newsclues 4y ago
  I’m Canadian, they seized bank accounts and used emergency laws to crush protesters. Democracy is already crumbling. And American has the NSA!

nix23 4y ago

>Government can't blackmail citizen Why not? >Do you really believe that in Europe governments are in control of everything like it happens in Russia or in North Korea? Wait you think Russia is in control of it's citizen? Oh man, western propaganda seams to work even better then the russian counterpart.

peoplefromibiza 4y ago
> Why not? Because they can't, the moment they do, they'll be roasted for doing it. Those who tried, failed miserably. Justice system here is not run by governments, it's a completely separated power. > Wait you think Russia is in control of it's citizen? Oh man, western propaganda seams to work even better then the russian counterpart. They control everything in the control rooms, which is not even the case oin EU democracies. Do you really believe EU governments will control every communication over the wire if this law is approved in the 26 EU countries?
- stjohnswarts 4y ago
  I think the EU wants to go through easy to rummage through stuff like email, texts, instant messenger (all easy to go through if unencrypted). I think that's what their warning shot is. Eventually they would like to put spyware in every app/phone and keep tabs on what you're doing. It's the same in America as well. Politician and the police state have no shame when it comes to wanting to take away your privacy "to think of the children" and "what about terrorists?". There is a reason we have search warrants. It's a compromise that has worked for centuries, and I don't see why that has to go out the door with new technologies.
  - peoplefromibiza 4y ago
    Seriously, if you start with "I think EU is turning into Sauron",you then can imply everything, you'll be mostly wrong though. > I think that's what their warning shot is These arguments have been in discussion for at least a decade. Why do you think they want to read your email? What purpose could it serve? Do you really think France will accept to put the email of their citizens out in the clear if Germany refuses? (nations can still delay the implementation of regulations, technically forever) > There is a reason we have search warrants They are still required. CSAM is only what Apple already does (and that's another reason why I don't buy Apple products).

School-Cotton 4y ago

> In Italy we had 67 different governments since 1946. Colloquially when Americans say “government” they are referring to the entire state, including not just elected officials but professional civil servants, police, courts, intelligence agencies, etc. You have definitely not had 67 different governments since 1946 in the sense that I think was meant.

peoplefromibiza 4y ago
> You have definitely not had 67 different governments I've studied English, not American. So government to me means means "the group of people who officially control a country", like in this BBC headline "Netanyahu out as new Israeli government approved". We definitely had 67 governments. Or 67 cabinets, if you prefer. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_prime_ministers_of_Italy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_prime_ministers_of_Ita...
- vel0city 4y ago
  Its definitely a complicated and messy idea. Many Americans would essentially only consider a complete change of constitution as a "new government", meanwhile in certain language in parliamentary structures there is a common phrase of "creating a new government" when an election takes place. Neither idea is really wrong, they're just coming from different perspectives. If you're using the same kind of terminology, the federal US has had probably 117 governments, as this is the 117th Congress. However, we as Americans don't necessarily consider this a "new government", in that many of the institutions aren't radically different. We still have the Centers of Medicare and Medicaid Services, we still have the FBI, we still have the CIA, we still have the Social Security Administration, we still have the NTSB, we still have the FAA, etc. For Americans, the institutions are a massive part of the identity of "the Federal government", and unless all the institutions change its pretty much seen as a continuous government. Its definitely a messy turn of phrase which means different things in different contexts. Either way, while Italy has had 67 cabinets/governments, I imagine a lot of institutions have stayed the same. The ability for abuse is based in the institutions, the will to abuse is often with the politicians. So its not like a "new government" woudl somehow wipe clean all the record collections and ability for the State to act on it, you just have different people telling people to pull the levers a little different every few years.

lapcat 4y ago

> What can they do with CSAM data? > Government can't blackmail citizen, they can't use CSAM scans for other purposes, they can't even authorize a scan, because that's the justice system prerogative. In the United States, legal blackmail is called a "plea bargain". You agree to admit you're guilty of a crime, even if you aren't, in return for the government not pursuing harsher charges against you. This occurs without trial, because of course the whole point of the plea bargain is to avoid going to trial. Why would an innocent defendant want to avoid trial? Well, good lawyers are extremely expensive, and public defenders are extremely overworked. Also, police will often say whatever they need to say on the stand to get a conviction and justify their arrest. How many cops are ever jailed themselves for perjury?

eru 4y ago
Compare 'Torture and Plea Bargaining' https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4154&context=uclrev https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?arti... > In this essay I shall address the modem American system of plea bargaining from a perspective that must appear bizarre, al though I hope to persuade you that it is illuminating. I am going to contrast plea bargaining with the medieval European law of torture. > My thesis is that there are remarkable parallels in origin, in function, and even in specific points of doctrine, between the law of torture and the law of plea bargaining. I shall suggest that these parallels expose some important truths about how criminal justice systems respond when their trial procedures fall into deep disorder.
wsc981 4y ago
One way to prevent getting yourself into too much trouble might be to never talk to cops (without a lawyer): https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE

Amezarak 4y ago

In English and particularly American English, “the government” is understood to encompass the justice system as well as Congress/parliament. People are taking about justice system abuses, not just some MP abusing his power. Law enforcement and courts control the country just as much as the parliament. This isn’t some feature of American government either: in the US local law enforcement is often completely divorced from the state and federal political process and is run independently at a local level, with sheriffs and district attorneys even being elected positions in many jurisdictions. There is no national police - the closest thing is the FBI (though there are a few other national law enforcement agencies), but it can go after only crimes involving multi-states or interstate commerce, and at a high level it is run essentially like state law enforcement organizations in other countries, largely independent of the political process, although at the very top it is politically appointed, usually with a career official placed in charge.

peoplefromibiza 4y ago
> In English and particularly American English, “the government” is understood to encompass the justice system as well as Congress/parliament That's only because in USA the justice system depend on the elected president and elected representatives of the State. But that's not true in Europe. Law enforcement forces and justice system employees only have to obey to the laws, not to the politicians in power. They can't be fired at will.
- Amezarak 4y ago
  > That's only because in USA the justice system depend on the elected president and elected representatives of the State. That’s absolutely not true in the US. Almost all law enforcement has no connection to the President whatsoever. The FBI does have a connection, the director is appointed with legislative assent, but FBI employees cannot be fired at will by politician or even the director. Further, the FBI didn’t even exist for most of American history, so that’s not why the term evolved the way it did. Also, your country almost certainly operates similarly to US federal law enforcement. Or are you claiming there’s no democratic oversight of or input into the justice system at all? Further, if you don’t consider the justice system part of the government, what is it?

stjohnswarts 4y ago

I think they would like to be in control of everything and know/document everything they can about every person's life. I understand that makes their job easier, and maybe even they have the best of intentions. But just a couple of weeks a go a racist was running in France (Le Penn) and not too long ago the leader of the free world a known POS, likely criminal, and racist DJT was in office. I don't want any of those people to have free access to any and whatever information that they want. I am thinking of the children and of future generations of them. If we don't stand up for our freedom and privacy we are also not standing for theirs.

hans_castorp 4y ago

> Do you really believe that in Europe governments are in control of everything like it happens in Russia or in North Korea? It certainly feels, as if they are trying to do that.

peoplefromibiza 4y ago
> It certainly feels, as if they are trying to do that. Putin's been there for 22 years, Kim is there by rights of birth, in my country the PM has been there for 18 months and it looks like he's not going to last till the natural end of the legislature, in 2023. His career as dictator 4 life looks pretty bleak from my POV.
- stephen_g 4y ago
  Well I guess that’s where the idea of the “deep state” or “shadow Government” comes from. Obviously I don’t think it’s true to anywhere near the extent that many conspiratorially minded people do, but I think there could be some truth to it, in that there are bureaucrats (especially in intelligence) in many countries who probably do have too much power and too little scrutiny and accountability over what they do, who manage to keep their positions for long periods of time and abuse their positions for various ends and reasons.

rmbyrro 4y ago

Does anyone know whether one can get more naive than that?