6 ms·

Here is the latest. The bill could not be passed on Spain’s presidency. The presidency is now on Belgium and Stasi-fans are trying to get this bill passed agai

Here is the latest. The bill could not be passed on Spain’s presidency. The presidency is now on Belgium and Stasi-fans are trying to get this bill passed again, hoping not to cause too much noise this time. The text of the bill was modified a bit, and this time they added an exception, though - Politicians and police are not subject to monitoring, only ordinal citizens messages’ should be wiretapped https://european-pirateparty.eu/chatcontrol-eu-ministers-want-to-exempt-themselves/ https://european-pirateparty.eu/chatcontrol-eu-ministers-wan...

Teever 2y ago
Ugh. Imagine living in a Bizarro world where the law said that private citizens could not be tapped without a warrant and probable cause but politicians and police must be surveilled to mitigate corruption.
- gpvos 2y ago
  You'd have to pay politicians and police a lot more then.
  - andy_ppp 2y ago
    Maybe you’d just get better people becoming politicians, ones that couldn’t be corrupted?
    - moffkalast 2y ago
      Those people don't want to be politicians.
      - squarefoot 2y ago
        This. We should never give power to those who are after it; the mere desire for power is a good clue that said power will be abused. Maybe not always, but it's often the case. Now, how do we vote someone who doesn't run for a seat? Heh, good question!
        Teever 2y ago
        You make the job more appealing to those kinds of people. I think one of the ways to do that is to make the job less appealing to the people who currently hold it.
        moffkalast 2y ago
        I think the hitchhiker's guide solution is not the worst, don't even tell them that they're doing the job and just take whatever they say and implement it.
      - forgetfreeman 2y ago
        Nobody that actually wants the job is fit by definition.
  - hulitu 2y ago
    Oh, come on. Police, ok, but politicians ?
    - noworld 2y ago
      The corrupted politicians by and large have the money already and have it through things like rent and capital gains, not salary. Paying more as a salary enables more average people to leave their current jobs to take part in politics.
    - rcxdude 2y ago
      Lower-level local politicians are probably the main issue. They're often paid so little it's effectively only a career option for the already-wealthy. And when that's the path towards the high-level, reasonably paid positions, it biases your pool a lot. (Not unlike industries with an expectation of a long period of unpaid internships in high cost-of-living areas)
dandanua 2y ago
> Politicians and police are not subject to monitoring, only ordinal citizens messages’ should be wiretapped Animal order, at its best.
- andy_ppp 2y ago
  All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.
- highcountess 2y ago
  It's far simpler than that, it's just the reconstitution of what we call aristocracy from the past, the reversal of the American Revolution and Constitution, the pole-flip of the power relationship between the "ordinary citizens" and the powerful/government. It is he same abusive pattern of lying used to manipulate people against the right to self-defense agains a tyrannical government through the supreme law that prohibits the government from infringing on the people's inalienable, God given right to the means of self-defense, as enshrined in the Second Amendment to the US Constitution. "Think of the children" the tyrants wail as they demand you give up your ability to defend yourself against the bombs they threaten to use against their own population that refuses to submit to the desires of the ruling class and they are also busy slaughtering children by the tens of thousands.
mantas 2y ago
> Politicians and police are not subject to monitoring Wonder how low would be the bar to become a politician. Signing up for a local council elections definitely makes one a politician, right!
- _heimdall 2y ago
  Robert Kennedy Jr had to make his own political party in some states to get on the ballot. I'd assume the average person in many areas could create their own party with a stack of paperwork. Then track down local laws that define what would be considered a politician, my guess would be something like actively running for an office or being named as a party's candidate or political leader.
- logicchains 2y ago
  Don't worry, they'll eventually close that loophole by banning unapproved political parties and candidates, like in China.
hulitu 2y ago
What they never seem to get is that the status of "politician" or "police" might not last forever.
_mlbt 2y ago
> Politicians and police are not subject to monitoring, only ordinal citizens messages’ should be wiretapped Of course, in 1984, their instruction manual, the top members of the party can turn their telescreens off.
- unclebucknasty 2y ago
  >Of course, in 1984 Kind of funny to hear people refer to 1984 these days. We're so far past it now, and we did it to ourselves; giving up location data for maps (and mobile phone function for that matter), a Ring doorbell on every front door, participation in social media, etc. But somehow it's all OK, because it's corporations instead of the government (a blurry line itself) on the other end.
  - ruszki 2y ago
    > we did it to ourselves Most people don't know that we did it. They still happily click on "accept all" and blame it on EU to need to do that. They don't know what the heck is that, and why they should understand what's written there. When they are asked cleanly, and simply whether they want to share their data to thousands of shady companies, about only a quarter choose yes. That's why Facebook had to force everybody in the EU to choose between paying and accepting it.
    - globular-toast 2y ago
      Everyone I know did, because I told them. But they did it anyway. Now we wish it was only as bad as Facebook was 15 years ago. Divide and conquer tactics work. Microsoft, Facebook and Apple all use it to great advantage. The funny thing is it was always about free software. Not enough people listened to Stallman. None of this could have happened if people rejected non-free software.
      - nalekberov 2y ago
        It could, and it happened, not long time ago, everyone thought just because xz software was free software, it's 100% safe, but it was not. There are numerous examples. Stallman lives in his own delusional world, and GPL not only solved the problem, it created more burden, that developers decided to use other less restrictive licenses.
2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago
> Stasi-fans Is this language necessary?
- baxtr 2y ago
  What’s wrong with it? It’s basically marketing. It’s the use of a certain language to draw attention to a very important topic.
  - blueflow 2y ago
    Its a needless emotionalisation of the topic. It might work with NPCs but people who can see behind it will get irritated.
    - pseudalopex 2y ago
      > NPCs You believe this is better than Stasi fans?
      - blueflow 2y ago
        Not really. But any euphemism (like sheep, lemming) i could use to refer to "people who are incapable of critical thinking" would, by that use, become a pejorative, so there is no way to win that battle. I picked NPC because it entered youth slang in the last years and understanding of that word is widespread.
        pseudalopex 2y ago
        > Not really. But any euphemism (like sheep, lemming) i could use to refer to "people who are incapable of critical thinking" would, by that use, become a pejorative, so there is no way to win that battle. Any euphemism they could use to refer to people who support mass surveillance would, by that use, become a pejorative, so there is no way to win that battle. In your reasoning at least. And none of these are euphemisms really.
consp 2y ago
> Politicians and police are not subject to monitoring Isn't that -again- a direct violation of the charter of fundamental rights (article 20)? (all are equal before the law)
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- psychoslave 2y ago
  but some are more equal than others
luxcem 2y ago
> Politicians and police are not subject to monitoring, only ordinal citizens messages’ should be wiretapped The inversion of values is frightening, politicians and police should be among the very few under scrutiny.
- oooyay 2y ago
  This is what struck me as well. This is in the vein of, "Who watches the watchmen?" I can understand a world, albeit it sounds chaotic, where nothing is monitored. I'm worried about a world where the only unmonitored people are people with definitive authority.

Teever 2y ago

Ugh. Imagine living in a Bizarro world where the law said that private citizens could not be tapped without a warrant and probable cause but politicians and police must be surveilled to mitigate corruption.

gpvos 2y ago
You'd have to pay politicians and police a lot more then.
- andy_ppp 2y ago
  Maybe you’d just get better people becoming politicians, ones that couldn’t be corrupted?
  - moffkalast 2y ago
    Those people don't want to be politicians.
    - squarefoot 2y ago
      This. We should never give power to those who are after it; the mere desire for power is a good clue that said power will be abused. Maybe not always, but it's often the case. Now, how do we vote someone who doesn't run for a seat? Heh, good question!
      - Teever 2y ago
        You make the job more appealing to those kinds of people. I think one of the ways to do that is to make the job less appealing to the people who currently hold it.
        moffkalast 2y ago
        I think the hitchhiker's guide solution is not the worst, don't even tell them that they're doing the job and just take whatever they say and implement it.
    - forgetfreeman 2y ago
      Nobody that actually wants the job is fit by definition.
- hulitu 2y ago
  Oh, come on. Police, ok, but politicians ?
  - noworld 2y ago
    The corrupted politicians by and large have the money already and have it through things like rent and capital gains, not salary. Paying more as a salary enables more average people to leave their current jobs to take part in politics.
  - rcxdude 2y ago
    Lower-level local politicians are probably the main issue. They're often paid so little it's effectively only a career option for the already-wealthy. And when that's the path towards the high-level, reasonably paid positions, it biases your pool a lot. (Not unlike industries with an expectation of a long period of unpaid internships in high cost-of-living areas)

dandanua 2y ago

> Politicians and police are not subject to monitoring, only ordinal citizens messages’ should be wiretapped Animal order, at its best.

andy_ppp 2y ago
All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.
highcountess 2y ago
It's far simpler than that, it's just the reconstitution of what we call aristocracy from the past, the reversal of the American Revolution and Constitution, the pole-flip of the power relationship between the "ordinary citizens" and the powerful/government. It is he same abusive pattern of lying used to manipulate people against the right to self-defense agains a tyrannical government through the supreme law that prohibits the government from infringing on the people's inalienable, God given right to the means of self-defense, as enshrined in the Second Amendment to the US Constitution. "Think of the children" the tyrants wail as they demand you give up your ability to defend yourself against the bombs they threaten to use against their own population that refuses to submit to the desires of the ruling class and they are also busy slaughtering children by the tens of thousands.

mantas 2y ago

> Politicians and police are not subject to monitoring Wonder how low would be the bar to become a politician. Signing up for a local council elections definitely makes one a politician, right!

_heimdall 2y ago
Robert Kennedy Jr had to make his own political party in some states to get on the ballot. I'd assume the average person in many areas could create their own party with a stack of paperwork. Then track down local laws that define what would be considered a politician, my guess would be something like actively running for an office or being named as a party's candidate or political leader.
logicchains 2y ago
Don't worry, they'll eventually close that loophole by banning unapproved political parties and candidates, like in China.

hulitu 2y ago

What they never seem to get is that the status of "politician" or "police" might not last forever.

_mlbt 2y ago

> Politicians and police are not subject to monitoring, only ordinal citizens messages’ should be wiretapped Of course, in 1984, their instruction manual, the top members of the party can turn their telescreens off.

unclebucknasty 2y ago
>Of course, in 1984 Kind of funny to hear people refer to 1984 these days. We're so far past it now, and we did it to ourselves; giving up location data for maps (and mobile phone function for that matter), a Ring doorbell on every front door, participation in social media, etc. But somehow it's all OK, because it's corporations instead of the government (a blurry line itself) on the other end.
- ruszki 2y ago
  > we did it to ourselves Most people don't know that we did it. They still happily click on "accept all" and blame it on EU to need to do that. They don't know what the heck is that, and why they should understand what's written there. When they are asked cleanly, and simply whether they want to share their data to thousands of shady companies, about only a quarter choose yes. That's why Facebook had to force everybody in the EU to choose between paying and accepting it.
  - globular-toast 2y ago
    Everyone I know did, because I told them. But they did it anyway. Now we wish it was only as bad as Facebook was 15 years ago. Divide and conquer tactics work. Microsoft, Facebook and Apple all use it to great advantage. The funny thing is it was always about free software. Not enough people listened to Stallman. None of this could have happened if people rejected non-free software.
    - nalekberov 2y ago
      It could, and it happened, not long time ago, everyone thought just because xz software was free software, it's 100% safe, but it was not. There are numerous examples. Stallman lives in his own delusional world, and GPL not only solved the problem, it created more burden, that developers decided to use other less restrictive licenses.

2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago

> Stasi-fans Is this language necessary?

baxtr 2y ago
What’s wrong with it? It’s basically marketing. It’s the use of a certain language to draw attention to a very important topic.
- blueflow 2y ago
  Its a needless emotionalisation of the topic. It might work with NPCs but people who can see behind it will get irritated.
  - pseudalopex 2y ago
    > NPCs You believe this is better than Stasi fans?
    - blueflow 2y ago
      Not really. But any euphemism (like sheep, lemming) i could use to refer to "people who are incapable of critical thinking" would, by that use, become a pejorative, so there is no way to win that battle. I picked NPC because it entered youth slang in the last years and understanding of that word is widespread.
      - pseudalopex 2y ago
        > Not really. But any euphemism (like sheep, lemming) i could use to refer to "people who are incapable of critical thinking" would, by that use, become a pejorative, so there is no way to win that battle. Any euphemism they could use to refer to people who support mass surveillance would, by that use, become a pejorative, so there is no way to win that battle. In your reasoning at least. And none of these are euphemisms really.

consp 2y ago

> Politicians and police are not subject to monitoring Isn't that -again- a direct violation of the charter of fundamental rights (article 20)? (all are equal before the law)

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
psychoslave 2y ago
but some are more equal than others

luxcem 2y ago

> Politicians and police are not subject to monitoring, only ordinal citizens messages’ should be wiretapped The inversion of values is frightening, politicians and police should be among the very few under scrutiny.

oooyay 2y ago
This is what struck me as well. This is in the vein of, "Who watches the watchmen?" I can understand a world, albeit it sounds chaotic, where nothing is monitored. I'm worried about a world where the only unmonitored people are people with definitive authority.