5 ms·
I am shocked that there isn’t more opposition from the general public to policies like this that erode privacy and freedom. I am a parent and can appreciate the
by cebert 6mo ago
I am shocked that there isn’t more opposition from the general public to policies like this that erode privacy and freedom. I am a parent and can appreciate the need to control what children do on the internet, but at some point parents need to parent. I fear we’re giving up a lot of freedom and adding unneeded complexity under the guise of keeping children safe.
- Ardon 6mo agoAs far as I can tell, people are getting blitzed. People I know are incredibly deep in their personalized bubble and genuinely aren't even hearing about it. It's genuinely distressing. In general and for the future of democracy.
- whilenot-dev 6mo agoIt feels like this era of hyper-individualism requires too much attention from each individual and favors those that can afford to outsource the work. While that stabilizes the role of society as a system, I feel like this is most worrisome for the less privileged in any low-trust environment.
- gmerc 6mo agoGermany is distracted with its version of “the gun debate” aka speed limits. Like every school shooting, every energy crisis brings opportunity to saturate the airwaves with shallow noise that gets people overly upset and they’ll ignore everything else. Every player on both sides is abusing this mechanic for all eternity.
- AnthonyMouse 6mo ago> every energy crisis brings opportunity to saturate the airwaves with shallow noise that gets people overly upset and they’ll ignore everything else. At least their version has an obvious solution: Make electric cars and solar panels and then stop having oil problems.
- lukan 6mo agoThe speeding debate won't go away with this, though, as speeding is not about oil.
- AnthonyMouse 6mo agoYou still can't get people upset about gas prices every time there isn't peace in the middle east once they stop buying gas.
- ArnoVW 6mo agoI believe the idea is that friction and resistance is proportional to the square of the speed. After a certain speed, every 10 mph extra starts to really count in your mileage.
- krater23 6mo agoThe idea is that some green ideologists think that when they don't need to drive a car because they don't leave their city, no one needs to drive a car. Because car driving creates CO2 which means car driving is bad. And they search for ways to implement that or make driving a car as bad as possible. Because they can't make the Deutsche Bahn better, they have to make driving your own car worse.
- AnthonyMouse 6mo agoBut then why not just make car driving not create CO2?
- kyboren 6mo agoBecause that doesn't play to Germany's industrial and economic strengths (precision machining, metallurgy, basically the whole ICE automobile supply chain). EVs are just mechanically much simpler, with a shorter BOM that largely centers around Asian (particularly Chinese) battery, REE, and semiconductor supply chains, so hundreds of thousands of good jobs that supported Germany's industrial model are now economically obsolete.
- whilenot-dev 6mo agoI think this view is too reductionist, as people can (and usually do) debate more than one topic at a time. The problem is that technological dependence isn't gaining enough precaution when commodity products are being discussed. What worries me is that it's a real global problem in all of our non-autocratic societies. On a positive note, I can see how this is actually becoming a common understanding and gaining traction, as hyped AI products are seen by some as 3rd-party- or SaaS-killers. It seems like we know how to differentiate between independence and dependence, and evaluate any risks affiliated with such a decision. But it baffles me that this differentiation manages to float as some ironic stream in our Zeitgeist, and just barely manages to be taken seriously.
- bluecalm 6mo agoImagine we had real democracy where people vote on issues. Speed limits? Vote once every 7 years or so on it and be done with it. Same for abortion laws, drug laws, gambling laws. Have a debate, vote, come back to it in 7 years if there is public interest. Preferably vote locally on issues that can be applied locally (like speed limits/enforcement etc.). Public debate and assessing politicians and parties would be so much cleaner then if they couldn't use polarizing issues to rally their support and do w/e they please on all other issues.
- heavyset_go 6mo agoPopular vote would have made sure civil rights legislation never passed and everything down to the schools and bathrooms would still be segregated.
- rcbdev 6mo agoWhat German civil rights legislation are you referring to?
- bluecalm 6mo agoI think you are wrong but it's hard to guess what would would happen in the past. Meanwhile a lot of unpopular policies are implemented right now. You are hoping "good minority" will get its way ahead of "evil majority" in indirect democracy but if anything I see the reverse happening in a lot of Western countries today.
- jahnu 6mo agoI would hate to live in that political system. Just imagining the ways it would be gamed and the billionaire press would leverage these votes makes me shudder. So far the best modern improvement I’ve seen (and it could be further improved of course) is the increasing use of citizens assemblies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens%27_assembly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens%27_assembly
- bluecalm 6mo ago
- looperhacks 6mo agoNobody is seriously discussing speed limits right now ...
- CrimsonRain 6mo agoall speed limits in highways are stupid. It should be follow distance enforcement instead.
- dboreham 6mo agoSingle-vehicle accidents exist.
- CrimsonRain 6mo agooh no! accidents exist!! Must ban all cars then?
- watwut 6mo ago> at some point parents need to parent You write it as if companies provided tons of help to parents and children. Meanwhile, they spend a lot of money to make it as hard as possible. Second, kids in Germany have generally a lot more freedom and there is less of knee jerk impulse to blame parents for every accident. Expectation is that adults dont harm them without parents having perfect control every sevond.
- shevy-java 6mo agoThe age verification sniffing laws will come to the EU and Germany too, so your assessment is, in my opinion, too limited and incomplete. It's not really about parenting, it is about grabbing more and more data from people.
- baxtr 6mo agoI think because most people, even tech savvy ones don’t understand how this might effect their lives. It’s too abstract. At least how it’s portrayed here. Contrast that with chat control. My government can read my WhatsApp messages? Not good! What’s the non-technical narrative here?
- shevy-java 6mo agoBut there is nothing abstract here. A private entity, situated in a country that is very hostile and pro-Russia, controls parts of the software stack and implementation here. That's a law written by lobbyists.
- hhh 6mo agoWell, it affects a tiny percentage of people today, so why would they see it as impacting them?
- AnthonyMouse 6mo agoDo people in Europe not intuitively understand that willingly making yourself [more] dependent on a foreign corporation is disadvantageous to you?
- herbst 6mo agoDo people outside of Europe do not understand how Germany is just a small fraction of Europe.
- not_that_d 6mo agoWhile true, it influences a lot in the EU
- herbst 6mo agoI don't think they influence more than France does. But I don't know, I live in Europe but don't care for the EU
- testing22321 6mo agoWhat percentage of people have a phone that is not apple or google?
- isolatedsystem 6mo agoI think the point is rather what percentage of people will continue to need to have a phone that is Apple or Google, due to death by a million decisions like these.
- testing22321 6mo agoWell the comment above was expressing disbelief that more people are not up in arms about this. When you realize the tiny tiny percentage of people that have a phone that is not apple or google, you understand why few people are up in arms. It simply doesn’t affect many people.
- AnthonyMouse 6mo agoThis feels like arguing that people wouldn't object to having a shock collar padlocked around their neck because it's not currently shocking them. You don't have to see very many moves ahead to guess what happens if you don't object. Whereas if the collar is touted as fashionable and the lock is hidden until it's engaged, now your problem is not that people don't care, it's that they don't know, which is different.
- maccard 6mo agoI don't think this analogy comes even close to holding water.
- AnthonyMouse 6mo agoSo cementing a dependency on paperclip-optimizing foreign megacorps to intermediate all your purchases and communications doesn't allow them to influence your behavior?
- sunshine-o 6mo agoThis is because the EU is basically designed as a lobbying platform. Note that lobbying by its own citizen is possible and welcome but expensive and require a some coordination, so basically foreign actors and big corporations are dominating. This is not a secret, the process is actually very transparent but it is "hidden" in all the documents nobody really want to dig into. Also the EU and all those states are also highly incompetent and pretty much only depends on low quality contractors. For example there is very little discussion and info about the fact that the EU digital infrastructure just got owned by what seems to be a random hacker group [0]. - [0] https://cyberalert.com.pl/articles/shinyhunters-eu-europa-breach-analysis.html https://cyberalert.com.pl/articles/shinyhunters-eu-europa-br...
- 7bit 6mo agoBecause it requires tech iCal knowledge which 99% of the population don't have.
- phatfish 6mo agoI'm not. Parents are very much in favour of restrictions on what can be accessed online. Parents can't control what their children are doing 24/7, and neither should they. But they should expect a society where children are protected from billion dollar corporations stealing their attention and radicalising them, at least until they are old enough to leave mandatory schooling. There are many "real world" age restrictions that exist, and we have decided those are of benefit to society in general. The "online world" is no different. If we can't have age restrictions online then they should just be abolished in the real world as well, in the name of preserving "privacy and freedom". The online world doesn't exist in isolation like it did in the 90s and 00s.
- illiac786 6mo agoIsn’t eIDAS about voluntarily authenticating rather than being controlled/monitored? Or am I mixing up?