5 ms·

Kutcher works with Thorn to help reduce peodophilia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorn_(organization) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorn_(organization)

jll29 4y ago
These people perhaps have hidden financial motives (e.g. share holdings in scanning software companies), or they lack the technical expertise to judge the impact, and they may actually think what they want to do is a good idea. In any case, they must be stopped at all cost. Freedom is priceless in the literal sense of the word, or people would not be willing to die for it. Germany has a historic responsibility (after two totalitarian regimes that spied on its cities in its past), which thankfully means a substantial part of the population was educated in school enough about the dangers that they would not support any party who let that kind of nonsense creep in, probably even regardless of which party is in power.
- throwaway8689 4y ago
  Simpler financial motive: residual payments on their old movies.
- thg 4y ago
  > Germany has a historic responsibility (after two totalitarian regimes that spied on its cities in its past), which thankfully means a substantial part of the population was educated in school enough about the dangers that they would not support any party who let that kind of nonsense creep in, probably even regardless of which party is in power. I wish it were so, but alas no. We have strong historic privacy laws, data protection authorities with teeth and a working court system constantly overturning new anti-privacy laws. Most of us Germans simply do neither care about privacy nor understand why "it all has to be so hard". The parties most people here vote for are also the parties that constantly enact laws eroding our privacy, only to then have them overturned by the courts. If not for those safeguards, Germany would again be on its best way on turning into an authoritarian police state again. The only reason Germany is opposing this right now is that we currently have both the Liberals and the Greens in the government coalition. The Social Democrats (SPD) would have just winked it through and the Christian Democrats (CDU/CSU) would have fiercely supported it.
- foxhill 4y ago
  more likely: they are victims. which makes sense. but there’s a reason why victims of crime aren’t allowed to be jurors of their own case.
gambiting 4y ago
OP question still stands - what does some random American actor know about technology and why is he trying to influence EU law? To "protect children"?
- shjake 4y ago
  What does some random EU bureaucrat know anything about it? The commission is even worse. Most countries just send their loudest/incompetent/etc idiots to get them out of the way for a few years. Just look the commission president…
  - gambiting 4y ago
    At least they are an EU bureaucrat not an American actor. They are paid to make these decisions, whether I agree with them or not. A random American actor is just butting their head in where it doesn't belong. It's like as if Daniel Radcliffe was trying to influence the American congress - even if he had the best intentions in mind, he should still be told to piss off.
    - throwaway8689 4y ago
      Shouldn't be a bureaucrat. With an elected official, at least I have the option to vote against them.
      - timeon 4y ago
        Like with positions in government, they are nominated by ruling parties.
      - gambiting 4y ago
        Parliament is elected. Comission isn't, like any comission in any country anywhere in the EU(and outside of it you include the UK). If you don't like the comission then make sure your vote for the parliament matters.
        4y ago
croes 4y ago
You mean child abuse. To reduce pedophilia they would need therapists not chat control.

jll29 4y ago

These people perhaps have hidden financial motives (e.g. share holdings in scanning software companies), or they lack the technical expertise to judge the impact, and they may actually think what they want to do is a good idea. In any case, they must be stopped at all cost. Freedom is priceless in the literal sense of the word, or people would not be willing to die for it. Germany has a historic responsibility (after two totalitarian regimes that spied on its cities in its past), which thankfully means a substantial part of the population was educated in school enough about the dangers that they would not support any party who let that kind of nonsense creep in, probably even regardless of which party is in power.

throwaway8689 4y ago
Simpler financial motive: residual payments on their old movies.
thg 4y ago
> Germany has a historic responsibility (after two totalitarian regimes that spied on its cities in its past), which thankfully means a substantial part of the population was educated in school enough about the dangers that they would not support any party who let that kind of nonsense creep in, probably even regardless of which party is in power. I wish it were so, but alas no. We have strong historic privacy laws, data protection authorities with teeth and a working court system constantly overturning new anti-privacy laws. Most of us Germans simply do neither care about privacy nor understand why "it all has to be so hard". The parties most people here vote for are also the parties that constantly enact laws eroding our privacy, only to then have them overturned by the courts. If not for those safeguards, Germany would again be on its best way on turning into an authoritarian police state again. The only reason Germany is opposing this right now is that we currently have both the Liberals and the Greens in the government coalition. The Social Democrats (SPD) would have just winked it through and the Christian Democrats (CDU/CSU) would have fiercely supported it.
foxhill 4y ago
more likely: they are victims. which makes sense. but there’s a reason why victims of crime aren’t allowed to be jurors of their own case.

gambiting 4y ago

OP question still stands - what does some random American actor know about technology and why is he trying to influence EU law? To "protect children"?

shjake 4y ago
What does some random EU bureaucrat know anything about it? The commission is even worse. Most countries just send their loudest/incompetent/etc idiots to get them out of the way for a few years. Just look the commission president…
- gambiting 4y ago
  At least they are an EU bureaucrat not an American actor. They are paid to make these decisions, whether I agree with them or not. A random American actor is just butting their head in where it doesn't belong. It's like as if Daniel Radcliffe was trying to influence the American congress - even if he had the best intentions in mind, he should still be told to piss off.
  - throwaway8689 4y ago
    Shouldn't be a bureaucrat. With an elected official, at least I have the option to vote against them.
    - timeon 4y ago
      Like with positions in government, they are nominated by ruling parties.
    - gambiting 4y ago
      Parliament is elected. Comission isn't, like any comission in any country anywhere in the EU(and outside of it you include the UK). If you don't like the comission then make sure your vote for the parliament matters.
      - 4y ago

croes 4y ago

You mean child abuse. To reduce pedophilia they would need therapists not chat control.