In the EU it's only a recurrent proposal by right wing collectives, in the US it's reality since time, there the privacy rights are inexistent. Privacy laws in the EU are not perfect, but light years away compared to the ones of the US. In the EU surveillance of privacy data only possible by the police in crime investigations against a person with an court order, by law. Nothing to do with the mass surveillance by private companies for commercial reasons like in the US.
One huge mistake that EU made was to rely on US equipment and software firms to build out infrastructure. I think there's a bit of a recognition of that now with the push for using open alternatives like nextcloud, but that really should've been the approach from the start.
Yes, in part. This is the reason because I prefer to use EU products in the ambit of privacy. Even so, the EU has pretty well forced large corporations to greatly restrict their surveillance practices, with respect to their services in the US.
A good example is M$, with only 1 tracking cookie on its page in Germany, vs more than 100 trackers in M$ US
Agree, but also soft and infrastructure in general. The EU has first-class products and only few of these are known. The only EU browser is Vivaldi (Norway/island), the other one, UR (French browser) is dead since years. Instead of this infamous Imgur spyware (which all people use), using for image and file sharing/hosting, the way better vgy.me (GB) FileCoffee (the best) NL, other companies like KDE (Germany), Proton (Suiss), Tuta (Germany), MetaGer search (Germany), etc.. All of these are way more private than most US alternatives.
For several years Kutcher lobbied the European Commission (until he was forced to resign as chairman of Thorn’s board after defending his acting colleague Danny Masterson when he was convicted of rape). He held meetings with others at the European Commission and had an extra close relationship with the Commission’s Eva Kaili (until she was convicted of bribery).
😂 two convicts trying to protect from crime & other criminals
Nobody in the pro-surveillance camp wants to actually catch pedophiles, that is just one of those "nobody can argue against it" excuses they have been using for ages.
Are you saying you DON'T want to protect the children??? You monster! /s
Edit: "Are you saying 9/11 didn't change everything, because 9/11 changed everything" --Peter Griffin (I may have the quote wrong, but it was something like that)
When articles were published about the EU Commission’s horrifyingly undemocratic approach, Ylva Johansson’s office at the European Commission responded by advertising on the platform X (formerly Twitter). They targeted advertisements (pro Chat Control) so that decision-makers in different countries would see them, but also so that they would not be seen by people suspected to be strongly against the proposal. The advertising was also targeted on the basis of religious and political affiliation and thus violated the EU’s own laws regarding micro-targeting. ...
There was no technology that could scan communication without looking at it. Parts of the Council of Ministers therefore proposed that scanning should be excluded for politicians, the police and intelligence services, as well as anything classified as ‘professional secrets.’ Obviously, there were politicians who were afraid that their secrets would leak, but who had nothing against mass surveillance of the broader population.
I am kind of tired of these posts. They need to be mentioned and discussed but you view these as an "anti west" article from my understanding.
The US, UK and other countries are bad but they are no where close to Russia, China, Iran or New Zealand in terms of the level of authoritarian surveillance. China and Russia especially are known for attacking and aiming to destroy free expression.
What I can hear is just how mad you are about seeing them. It's really great to know that they get under your skin to the point where you have to follow me around and make these vapid comments of yours.
Every society puts limits on free expression. Even the most thoroughly indoctrinated liberals are starting to realize why free speech absolutism is a bad idea. The only difference is in the limits on free speech different societies place, and what types of speech are suppressed. It's pure chauvinism to think that the west got the balance right while everyone else got it wrong. Meanwhile, the number of parties have fuck all to do with anything. It's whom the parties represent that matters.
I never said the US was perfect. It is far from it.
However, I do think freedom of belief and freedom of speech are very important. You also need some good journalism somewhere in the mix.
I find it kind of concerning that Russia, a large powerful country, is now being run by a man who is set on keeping power and restricting access to information. Russia now has its own Wikipedia that is heavily censored because the government is scared that Russians might start not liking the current government. I don't know if you are in Russia or somewhere close but I would personally refuse to accept censorship. Using Tor is a must now to find out the truth. Draw your own conclusions and be mindful of bias and blatant propaganda. I find that news sites like the BBC tend to be fairly trustworthy although they are UK left leaning.
I also think "East vs West" is a cold war type settlement shared by leaders in both Russia and the US. In reality the cold war didn't do much other than cost a lot of time and money. It did jump start space travel.
I am sorry if I am being a bit harsh. It just annoys me at the level of blinders people have. I'm sure I have my own set of blinders.
It's pretty clear that access to information has very little to do with what the government actually does or whose interests it represents. For example, here's what a study analyzing many decades of US policy had to conclude
US gives people the right to scream into the void while any tangible freedoms they had have been stripped away long ago. The public has no agency within the political system, and their interests aren't represented. Everybody knows this, and nobody can do anything about it. The US is an open dictatorship of capital, but you get this intangible free speech that can't actually be translated into any meaningful action. And when people do try to use their speech to effect change then the government murders them as seen with MLK, Fred Hampton, Assange, and many others.
If you think this is a better model for society than what China is doing, I really don't know what else to tell you. At least in China the government demonstrably works in the interest of the working majority. I'll take that over free speech absolutism any day.
That's demonstrably false. People in China protest all the time. The fact that you genuinely believe this shows just how gullible you are falling for the propaganda that your state media like BBC feeds you.
Last I checked creating parties is an expression of speech. Also, if you love free speech absolutism so much, then there's always twitter. Sounds like you'd be much more comfortable with that crowd.
US literally starts and supports wars, spends tax money on nothing except military and surveillance, creates propaganda to make the people more aggressive and "patriotic". The first thing is worse than China's because China hurts freedom when US hurts physically. Technically it is worse. You can say that there's bad air quality in China but it's not the same thing
Why not just discuss what to do about it without indulging in the politics that you don't want to engage with? Lemmy is full of people capable of talking about technology
Its not that these articles are irrelevant. They are definitely talking about real privacy issues. The problem is when people try to say that Russia or China are some how these great empires that are complete free of issues.
I'm not sure if you realized or not but Russia and China are much less private and have state dictated history. You can't even read the public Wikipedia articles as they give you access to real information instead of the state narrative. For instance, back in WWII the US ran interment camps to imprison Asian Americans. It was wrong and terrible in many ways (I used to know a survivor) but the difference is it isn't illegal to talk about or share information and discuss historically or current events.
Maybe its just me but I don't like when people comment saying how China or Russia can do no wrong.
You're literally the one who sealioned into this thread to bleat about Russia and China, sucking up air from any meaningful discussion. Try engaging with the content of the article instead of doing your whatabouting. Also not sure who said that Russia or China can do no wrong. Seems like a weird straw man you came up with in lieu of having any actual point to make.
I do think we should raise awareness of attacks on democracy, freedom of speech or journalism.
I kind of annoys me a little when some person on Lemmy says how great Russia or China is. Sure US surveillance is not great to to compare it to China is not a great comparison. Maybe I'm just taking it to seriously.
China and Russia are far more free than the US. In the US you can't even peacefully protest against genocide. You can't even criticize politicians. One guy was visited by capitol police just for criticizing AOC on Twitter (he did not threaten her in any way). In China and Russia you can talk shit about politicians all you want. Nobody cares.