3 ms·

I prefer having strong governmental institutions with elected officials who answers to their voters compared to large corporations who answer to shareholders T

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.

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.