5 ms·
If/when American law mirrors it or we sign a treaty, it applies to me. Until then, it doesn’t. The penalty could be “shoot on sight” and it doesn’t matter as lo
by kstrauser 2y ago
If/when American law mirrors it or we sign a treaty, it applies to me. Until then, it doesn’t. The penalty could be “shoot on sight” and it doesn’t matter as long as I’m outside their jurisdiction.
I’m kind of fascinated by the often simultaneously held beliefs of “America doesn’t make the world’s rules!” and “…EU does!” Countries can influence each other, sure, but if EU (US or Canada or Brazil) makes a law, it doesn’t apply to people not under those jurisdictions.
- logifail 2y ago> If/when American law mirrors it or we sign a treaty, it applies to me. Until then, it doesn’t. The penalty could be “shoot on sight” and it doesn’t matter as long as I’m outside their jurisdiction. That's great if you never need to|want to travel. What about the time you happen to end up in transit through an airport in a country where they've put you on their watchlist, they grab you airside and hold you for hours while they look at your devices....? https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/18/glenn-greenwald-guardian-partner-detained-heathrow https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/18/glenn-greenwal...
- kstrauser 2y agoI’m not going to live my life worried about hypotheticals. What if my plane goes down, I get rescued by North Korea, and they get mad at something I said about Kim Jong Number Un? That’d suck, but the possibility isn’t going to make me self-limit in the mean time. There are enough real concerns on my plate.
- MacrohardDoors 2y agoYes, there are a lot of people living their lives like that. Live fast, die young kind of mentality. Hypotheticals in tech pretty much always come true in the end. And especially fast these days. The world is gearing up for something, and personally I smell a global war and a reshuffling of world powers in my lifetime.
- kstrauser 2y agoDo you comply with PRC law, or even know what it asks of you? If not, why? I don’t know and don’t care because I don’t have to. I live in a sovereign nation and I’m not obligated to follow their rules, any more than their citizens are obligated to follow mine. That’s how countries work. If my country signs a treaty with them, then I have to obey that specific law. Absent that, I don’t.
- MacrohardDoors 2y agoHell no I don’t abide by laws of the PRC. If they had all the things I’d ever said in my life time they’d probably execute me. I speak my mind all the time. That’s what terrifies me though, because in 20 years time they could be running the show. So why would I want to make it so easy for them to know everything I have ever said, why would I want that data stored about me.
- stickfigure 2y agoTheoretically a valid risk, and when the first person gets arrested over a cookie banner, I'll take it more seriously.
- toyg 2y agoLet's not mix contexts. This legislation was (and is) pushed by European security services. If it passes, I guarantee that it will be (ab)used widely.
- eigenket 2y agoIt was mostly pushed by people (Ylva Johansson) linked to American organisations (Thorn) who are in the business of selling chat monitoring software.
- toyg 2y agoAnd their customers are...?
- eigenket 2y agoCurrently random companies [1], if the shitty legislation gets passed then every EU government. [1] https://www.thorn.org/solutions/for-platforms/ https://www.thorn.org/solutions/for-platforms/ Their website lists oracle, slack, ancestry.com and others
- toyg 2y agoSecurity services typically don't publicize what they use, for obvious reasons. Unless you can point out links between the Hungarian government (who announced they will re-table the directive in a few months) and such companies, I'd say Occam stays with the security services.
- eigenket 2y ago
- bee_rider 2y agoIf the EU is really coming down hard on people who do mundane stuff like host a Mastodon node and chat with their friends, then I’d avoid them just like I’d avoid North Korea or any other authoritarian country. As indicated in that article, the UK kinda sucks, so, like, don’t go there. Whatever, they don’t have any good beaches anyway.
- eigenket 2y agoYou can lay many faults at the UK's door, but they do have some very nice beaches. Sadly outside summer the weather is usually to bad for them to be worth enjoying, but in summer they're pretty nice.
- peterclary 2y agoWe used to have some very nice beaches, but unfortunately the Tory government thought it would be a great idea to allow water companies to discharge sewage into the waterways at will (because shareholders), so I personally wouldn't take the chance nowadays, although it doesn't seem to bother everyone.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- akie 2y agoYou make it sound like the EU is the only one interested in stuff like this... but you do know that all your communications are already monitored and recorded by the NSA and that the person who revealed it is in hiding from the US government, right?
- causi 2y agoPeople need to stop treating other countries as if they're just the next town over. When you visit a place or do business with them you are in part endorsing how they behave and how they govern themselves. If you have a problem locking people up for blasphemy, don't spend money in a country that does it. If you have a problem with arresting people for illegal gestures, don't fly there to take instagram photos. Stop ignoring behavior you find abhorrent for the sake of personal convenience.
- Dah00n 2y ago>doesn’t apply to people not under those jurisdictions. Of course not but if an American company in the US caters to EU users with, for example, a localized site it does absolutely apply to them. Same the other way around. Just because you or your server are too small to matter doesn't mean it is irrelevant. America doesn't make the world rules is often said when they create one set of rules for them and another for everyone else (US can have warships near china but if it was reversed we would have a new Cuban crisis) and when they create rules in places they have the most power to create international laws that fit their world view but not their enemies. In a perfect world the US would have zero power and zero say a meter outside its borders.
- stickfigure 2y agoNobody is going to extradite you for not having a cookie banner. EU can't _actually_ make laws like that. The reason gambling/child porn/fincrime/etc are enforced across national boundaries is that everyone (at least, in the western world) respects those laws and absolutely will extradite. Cookie laws, anti-encryption laws, anti-(adult)-porn laws are not like this.
- bee_rider 2y agoDid we actually complain about a Chinese freedom of navigation activity? I think the US vigorously supports the right of all countries to send a carrier fleet to hang out in international waters wherever…
- Onavo 2y ago> If/when American law mirrors it or we sign a treaty, it applies to me. Until then, it doesn’t. The penalty could be “shoot on sight” and it doesn’t matter as long as I’m outside their jurisdiction. Try ignoring the GDPR, they will get upset at you really quickly.
- bee_rider 2y agoWhat are they going to do, invade the US to arrest one guy?
- kstrauser 2y agoAnd if they do? I like the GDPR. I comply with the local CCPA version. I’m not legally obligated to follow the GDPR though. I’m unaware of any agreement the US has with EU that puts me under its jurisdiction.
- inamorty 2y agoWho is "they" and where is it being ignored? GDPR is quite clear on where it applies.
- wolfendin 2y agoBack when I ran a nitter instance, I’d get emails about the GDPR. I’d simply delete them, no problem.
- chx 2y agoThe United States has arrested Marcus Hutchins for violating its laws while he was not inside the United States. This was not the first time, they also arrested Sklyarov for writing software they didn't like -- but the software was written in Russia. This is plain insanity and only the United States could get away with it. (The Sklyarov arrest together with the CFAA was one of the reasons I have chosen not to immigrate to the USA btw.) For example, imagine you being arrested at Frankfurt airport because you posted something a year ago that falls under Strafgesetzbuch section 86a. You would need to review your entire post history going back years and compare it to the laws of every country you touch during your travels.
- troad 2y ago> For example, imagine you being arrested at Frankfurt airport because you posted something a year ago Doesn't this happen all the time? Wasn't David Irving repeatedly arrested and charged in many countries in continental Europe for things he said and wrote while abroad? (Not defending Irving's views, he's a noxious lying toad, but the principle here appears to be the same.)
- deaddodo 2y ago> If/when American law mirrors it or we sign a treaty, it applies to me. Until then, it doesn’t. The penalty could be “shoot on sight” and it doesn’t matter as long as I’m outside their jurisdiction. Except the part where the CANZUK/US/EU blocs generally have reciprocal agreements and Interpol is perfectly empowered to enact international law inside of the US, as of 2009. Choosing to take this stance in one of the Western Nations is foolish to an almost ignorant degree. If one of them feels you broke a big enough law, it's trivial (at best) to execute upon it.
- kstrauser 2y agoThis isn’t international law. If it had passed, it would have been an EU law without a US counterpart.
- deaddodo 2y agoYes, but you can break EU law outside of the EU, especially digital crimes. Foreign national hackers are arrested all over the western world for offenses in other countries, for instance.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- troad 2y agoThis is complete nonsense (and borderline gibberish - Interpol can't 'enact' any laws in the US). Extradition generally requires that the thing you're being extradited for would also a crime in the jurisdiction you're in. For speech offences, this makes many foreign judgments unenforceable in the US due to the First Amendment, not to mention additional formal protections like the SPEECH Act.