Comment by bitwize

Comment by bitwize 10 hours ago

7 replies

And it's not just here.

The EU: Unlike the barbarians across the pond, we actually protect people's privacy rights.

Also the EU: ChAt CoNtRoL

ryanisnan 10 hours ago

The problem seems deeply fundamental to what it means to be a human.

On one hand, there's a lack of clear leadership, unifying the societal approach, on top of inherently different value systems held by those individuals.

It seems like increasingly, it's up to technologists, like ones who author our anti-surveillance tools, to create a free way forward.

whimsicalism 10 hours ago

this view presupposes the state as “just another actor” as opposed to a privileged one that can take actions that private actors can’t

  • lupusreal 9 hours ago

    In the matter of corporations vs governments, if you tally up number of people shot it's clear which of the two is more dangerous. You would think Europe of all regions would be quick to recognize this.

    I don't like corporations spying on me, but it doesn't scare me nearly as much as the government doing it. In fact the principle risk from corporations keeping databases is giving the government something to snatch.

    • whimsicalism 9 hours ago

      because the government has a monopoly on violence. i would much prefer that to corporations being able to wage war themselves

      • lupusreal 7 hours ago

        Who is arguing for corporations to wage war? What an absolutely insane strawman. What I am arguing against is letting governments grant themselves the ability to spy on their own populations on an unprecedented scale, because governments "waging war" (mass murder) against their own people is a historically common occurrence.

  • Karunamon 9 hours ago

    Those privileged actions are mostly irrelevant when discussing mass surveillance. Doubly so since they can just buy or acquire the data from corps.

immibis 7 hours ago

The EU has multiple parts. One part keeps asking for chat control, and another part keeps saying no.