7 ms·

I think the difference in how government enforces regulations is very different between the EU and US Overall I don't think EU will go after smaller projects,

I think the difference in how government enforces regulations is very different between the EU and US Overall I don't think EU will go after smaller projects, since that would hurt the economy in an undesirable way. I think it's more likely that they'll use this to go after bigger corporations since that's an actual security risks for member states That's also why there's a statement about proportionality in the proposal. The more critical the software is, the more you'll need to ensure safety

EGreg 4y ago
And I predict there will be a lot more pseudonyms like Satoshi cropping up soon.
aww_dang 4y ago
>Overall I don't think EU will go after smaller projects... Sure keeping your head down is always a smart choice. But willfully living at the whims of capricious bureaucrats? Given the choice I'd prefer to not have that sword of Damocles in play.
- Scandiravian 4y ago
  I prefer having strong governmental institutions with elected officials who answers to their voters compared to large corporations who answer to shareholders Taking GDPR as an example, it shows that enforcement is done in proportion to the size of the corporation. Big corporations get fined, smaller companies receive warnings
  - aww_dang 4y ago
    And what of the failure mode when these institutions are swayed by malign incentives? If there are tangible harms, why have judicial institutions not entertained civil suits? If there are tangible harms, yet the institutions have not entertained civil suits, could it be that malign incentives are already in play? Would you trust voters in your locality to vote on how you create your next software project? Shall we vote on what you eat for lunch? Ultimately these discussions boil down to our core premises. Doubtful either of us will convince the other to change those.
    - Scandiravian 4y ago
      To me it's not about convincing anyone. I'm sharing my views on the topic because I'm interested in hearing other opinions and broaden my perspective I can understand why some people are worried when looking at how many governmental institutions have failed in their duty to serve the public. The EU has definitely got its share off bad decisions, but overall I think it has a good track record Politically I'd probably identify myself as an anarchist, so if I could change the world to look exactly like I thought best, I'd probably get rid of nation states and governments all together That's however not how the world works and I'd rather work with the tools I have available right now There's a war going on not far away from where I live and cyber attacks against critical infrastructure are happening almost daily Even on this site, where I think discussions are generally pretty civilised, I'm starting to see a lot of retoric that's suspiciously similar to the alt-right retoric in many other places on the web It makes me think that there's a growing number of users here on this site who are only here to further their political agenda of authoritarianism and violence That scares me much more than having to make sure that the code I write doesn't have security vulnerabilities I think it's worth considering what actions can be taken to preserve society the best under these circumstances (society is different from government and states in this context)
      - aww_dang 4y ago
        I just like to have the discussion, but the disclaimer helps to keep it civil. >Politically I'd probably identify myself as an anarchist, so if I could change the world to look exactly like I thought best, I'd probably get rid of nation states and governments all together For me it doesn't matter if the final stop is minarchism or ancaptistan. Steps towards either are an improvement. Bureaucrats regulating software development isn't it. >Alt-right... Maybe you could be more specific here? There was recently an article and video submitted here which accused Murray Rothbard of being a "right-wing extremist". It was yet another sloppily argued anti-cryptocurrency hit piece. Similarly we can call anarchists of all flavors extremists. The term alt-right or extremist is mostly a scare word from my perspective. It is hard to find meaning behind it. >It makes me think that there's a growing number of users here on this site who are only here to further their political agenda of authoritarianism and violence >Authoritarianism... Isn't an authority dictating which kinds of software you may publish authoritarian by definition? >That scares me much more than having to make sure that the code I write doesn't have security vulnerabilities Agreed 100%, authoritarianism and individual autonomy is a bigger concern. Which is why I'm not a fan of these regulations. Furthermore, I suspect most users here already put forth an effort to avoid security issues. In the US there is a bureau called the EPA. When polluters pollute within the guidelines, they have no liability. Perhaps now that software development is regulated we will see similar protections for incompetence.
  - xhxhxh 4y ago
    [flagged]
    - Scandiravian 4y ago
      Little bit of column A, little bit of column B
  - fidgewidge 4y ago
    None of the people involved with this law are elected. Even once it reaches the so-called Parliament, the people there don't have any real power. At best they can provide opinions and hope the Commission listens. In practice and exactly because they have no power the EUP is full of cheerleaders who never saw a new EU power they didn't like.
    - Scandiravian 4y ago
      I'm in disagreement with this. It's simply factually wrong You seem to mix the purpose of the Commission with that of the Council of the European Union, which is a body that has the power to make decisions. It consists of elected representatives from member states The European Parliament, which is again all elected representatives, makes decisions that the Commission must implement, not the other way around The Commission are the ones who draws up proposals and that they hope the Parliament will pass Please educate yourself on this, as this kind of misinformation is undermining trust in the democratic process
      - fidgewidge 4y ago
        You're describing the way a normal democratic government works. The EU parliament can't force the commission to do anything other than a mass resignation, which hasn't happened for decades. The "parliament" can't even propose changes to the law, let alone arbitrarily command the Commission like in a virtual government. That means it's not even really a Parliament!
        Scandiravian 4y ago
        I'm pointing out that your post is factually wrong. Now I'm moving on
        fidgewidge 4y ago
        You're using a (hopefully not deliberately) very deceptive set of phrasings to make it sounds like the EP or even the Council is in charge. Almost nobody tries to make that argument because it's clearly not the case and that situation is written into the treaties. All this stuff starts and ends with the Commission which is where all the actual decisions get made, the not-really-a-"Parliament" is just along for the ride and asked to rubber-stamp things from time to time. As for the council, it also cannot actually propose changes to EU law. He who makes the law ... makes the law, it's as simple as that.
fidgewidge 4y ago
> I don't think EU will go after smaller projects, since that would hurt the economy in an undesirable way The EU institutions pretty regularly do things that hurt the economy in order to prioritize their own political or social goals, so that doesn't mean much.
- Scandiravian 4y ago
  I used the word "undesirable" purposefully. The economy is not the be all end all metric of a successful society; in my opinion at least
  - fidgewidge 4y ago
    It renders your statement meaningless then. "The EU won't hurt the economy unless it thinks there's a reason to do so". So what, that statement boils down to nothing.
    - Scandiravian 4y ago
      Or I simply deemed that you were not worth the effort needed for writing a longer response with an explanation of the cultural and historical context of European political landscape
Attrecomet 4y ago
>Overall I don't think EU will go after smaller projects, since that would hurt the economy in an undesirable way. I think it's more likely that they'll use this to go after bigger corporations since that's an actual security risks for member states That is a very rose-tinted view of EU regulators. Europeans are people like everywhere else on the planet, we're not somehow immune to regulatory capture (though I feel it might help the institutions that we haven't yet powerful blocs like the GOP that set out to destroy any kind of regulation in order to prove it's infeasible). Heck, German industry giants are practically married to the state here, there's absolutely no fucking way a company like VW or Opel will go under if a rich government like Germany can do anything about it. More to the point, the author themself is pro-CRA for a range of things that seem to have purely positive effects, as they spell out quite clearly in the article. The points brought up are nevertheless important: we shouldn't be okay with legislator making objectively shitty laws devoid of any technical comprehension or economical realism and hope it'll kinda be fine when the bureaucracy and courts actually implement it. Just having the danger of having to pay 15M€ for my open source project because it might be used commercially is a horrendous imposition.
- Scandiravian 4y ago
  I agree that the authors points are important - can't see that I've said otherwise anywhere Looking at the history of GDPR fines, big corporations have been fined large amounts, small companies have gotten warnings Given that legal precedence I think saying that open-source maintainers risk 15M euro fines is blowing things out of proportion
  - Attrecomet 4y ago
    European law is a lot less precedence driven that common law (though it still is a bit), so why shouldn't we demand clear rules instead of dangerous vagueness? And for a small open source project, a 500€ fine is enough to make development and publication unattractive, a percentage of a devs yearly income is painful, and tens of thousands of Euros would be dangerous to the long-term financial well-being of the developers. Even if the fines are a lot lower than 15M€, this proposal stays shit as written.

EGreg 4y ago

And I predict there will be a lot more pseudonyms like Satoshi cropping up soon.

aww_dang 4y ago

>Overall I don't think EU will go after smaller projects... Sure keeping your head down is always a smart choice. But willfully living at the whims of capricious bureaucrats? Given the choice I'd prefer to not have that sword of Damocles in play.

Scandiravian 4y ago
I prefer having strong governmental institutions with elected officials who answers to their voters compared to large corporations who answer to shareholders Taking GDPR as an example, it shows that enforcement is done in proportion to the size of the corporation. Big corporations get fined, smaller companies receive warnings
- aww_dang 4y ago
  And what of the failure mode when these institutions are swayed by malign incentives? If there are tangible harms, why have judicial institutions not entertained civil suits? If there are tangible harms, yet the institutions have not entertained civil suits, could it be that malign incentives are already in play? Would you trust voters in your locality to vote on how you create your next software project? Shall we vote on what you eat for lunch? Ultimately these discussions boil down to our core premises. Doubtful either of us will convince the other to change those.
  - Scandiravian 4y ago
    To me it's not about convincing anyone. I'm sharing my views on the topic because I'm interested in hearing other opinions and broaden my perspective I can understand why some people are worried when looking at how many governmental institutions have failed in their duty to serve the public. The EU has definitely got its share off bad decisions, but overall I think it has a good track record Politically I'd probably identify myself as an anarchist, so if I could change the world to look exactly like I thought best, I'd probably get rid of nation states and governments all together That's however not how the world works and I'd rather work with the tools I have available right now There's a war going on not far away from where I live and cyber attacks against critical infrastructure are happening almost daily Even on this site, where I think discussions are generally pretty civilised, I'm starting to see a lot of retoric that's suspiciously similar to the alt-right retoric in many other places on the web It makes me think that there's a growing number of users here on this site who are only here to further their political agenda of authoritarianism and violence That scares me much more than having to make sure that the code I write doesn't have security vulnerabilities I think it's worth considering what actions can be taken to preserve society the best under these circumstances (society is different from government and states in this context)
    - aww_dang 4y ago
      I just like to have the discussion, but the disclaimer helps to keep it civil. >Politically I'd probably identify myself as an anarchist, so if I could change the world to look exactly like I thought best, I'd probably get rid of nation states and governments all together For me it doesn't matter if the final stop is minarchism or ancaptistan. Steps towards either are an improvement. Bureaucrats regulating software development isn't it. >Alt-right... Maybe you could be more specific here? There was recently an article and video submitted here which accused Murray Rothbard of being a "right-wing extremist". It was yet another sloppily argued anti-cryptocurrency hit piece. Similarly we can call anarchists of all flavors extremists. The term alt-right or extremist is mostly a scare word from my perspective. It is hard to find meaning behind it. >It makes me think that there's a growing number of users here on this site who are only here to further their political agenda of authoritarianism and violence >Authoritarianism... Isn't an authority dictating which kinds of software you may publish authoritarian by definition? >That scares me much more than having to make sure that the code I write doesn't have security vulnerabilities Agreed 100%, authoritarianism and individual autonomy is a bigger concern. Which is why I'm not a fan of these regulations. Furthermore, I suspect most users here already put forth an effort to avoid security issues. In the US there is a bureau called the EPA. When polluters pollute within the guidelines, they have no liability. Perhaps now that software development is regulated we will see similar protections for incompetence.
- xhxhxh 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - Scandiravian 4y ago
    Little bit of column A, little bit of column B
- fidgewidge 4y ago
  None of the people involved with this law are elected. Even once it reaches the so-called Parliament, the people there don't have any real power. At best they can provide opinions and hope the Commission listens. In practice and exactly because they have no power the EUP is full of cheerleaders who never saw a new EU power they didn't like.
  - Scandiravian 4y ago
    I'm in disagreement with this. It's simply factually wrong You seem to mix the purpose of the Commission with that of the Council of the European Union, which is a body that has the power to make decisions. It consists of elected representatives from member states The European Parliament, which is again all elected representatives, makes decisions that the Commission must implement, not the other way around The Commission are the ones who draws up proposals and that they hope the Parliament will pass Please educate yourself on this, as this kind of misinformation is undermining trust in the democratic process
    - fidgewidge 4y ago
      You're describing the way a normal democratic government works. The EU parliament can't force the commission to do anything other than a mass resignation, which hasn't happened for decades. The "parliament" can't even propose changes to the law, let alone arbitrarily command the Commission like in a virtual government. That means it's not even really a Parliament!
      - Scandiravian 4y ago
        I'm pointing out that your post is factually wrong. Now I'm moving on
        fidgewidge 4y ago
        You're using a (hopefully not deliberately) very deceptive set of phrasings to make it sounds like the EP or even the Council is in charge. Almost nobody tries to make that argument because it's clearly not the case and that situation is written into the treaties. All this stuff starts and ends with the Commission which is where all the actual decisions get made, the not-really-a-"Parliament" is just along for the ride and asked to rubber-stamp things from time to time. As for the council, it also cannot actually propose changes to EU law. He who makes the law ... makes the law, it's as simple as that.

fidgewidge 4y ago

> I don't think EU will go after smaller projects, since that would hurt the economy in an undesirable way The EU institutions pretty regularly do things that hurt the economy in order to prioritize their own political or social goals, so that doesn't mean much.

Scandiravian 4y ago
I used the word "undesirable" purposefully. The economy is not the be all end all metric of a successful society; in my opinion at least
- fidgewidge 4y ago
  It renders your statement meaningless then. "The EU won't hurt the economy unless it thinks there's a reason to do so". So what, that statement boils down to nothing.
  - Scandiravian 4y ago
    Or I simply deemed that you were not worth the effort needed for writing a longer response with an explanation of the cultural and historical context of European political landscape

Attrecomet 4y ago

>Overall I don't think EU will go after smaller projects, since that would hurt the economy in an undesirable way. I think it's more likely that they'll use this to go after bigger corporations since that's an actual security risks for member states That is a very rose-tinted view of EU regulators. Europeans are people like everywhere else on the planet, we're not somehow immune to regulatory capture (though I feel it might help the institutions that we haven't yet powerful blocs like the GOP that set out to destroy any kind of regulation in order to prove it's infeasible). Heck, German industry giants are practically married to the state here, there's absolutely no fucking way a company like VW or Opel will go under if a rich government like Germany can do anything about it. More to the point, the author themself is pro-CRA for a range of things that seem to have purely positive effects, as they spell out quite clearly in the article. The points brought up are nevertheless important: we shouldn't be okay with legislator making objectively shitty laws devoid of any technical comprehension or economical realism and hope it'll kinda be fine when the bureaucracy and courts actually implement it. Just having the danger of having to pay 15M€ for my open source project because it might be used commercially is a horrendous imposition.

Scandiravian 4y ago
I agree that the authors points are important - can't see that I've said otherwise anywhere Looking at the history of GDPR fines, big corporations have been fined large amounts, small companies have gotten warnings Given that legal precedence I think saying that open-source maintainers risk 15M euro fines is blowing things out of proportion
- Attrecomet 4y ago
  European law is a lot less precedence driven that common law (though it still is a bit), so why shouldn't we demand clear rules instead of dangerous vagueness? And for a small open source project, a 500€ fine is enough to make development and publication unattractive, a percentage of a devs yearly income is painful, and tens of thousands of Euros would be dangerous to the long-term financial well-being of the developers. Even if the fines are a lot lower than 15M€, this proposal stays shit as written.