HackerTrans
TopNewTrendsCommentsPastAskShowJobs

Xelbair

2,205 karmajoined 8 лет назад
i love shitposting.

comments

Xelbair
·позавчера·discuss
Which would be fine, if it was just a trade union like originally designed. I really love the original idea of EU. I could even get behind more federation style, although trade union is vastly preferable for me - but I do understand people pushing for it.

Yet EU has overstepped that ages ago, and you can see that with SKG recently. The only tool we, as citizens, have to actually try to affect EC is effectively useless. EC can be wined and dined by lobbyists, including outside of official recorded proceedings(!) and can just ignore you.

Not to mention a lot of other systems in EU were made with idea that countries would operate for their own best interest, and that interest was aligned for every member state:

- Shared energy market, which was crashed by Germany ideologically decommissioning nuclear power plants in middle of energy crisis.

- Free movement of people within Schengen area - which is crashed by countries taking mass of immigrants which they think they need(i don't live there so i won't judge), but then they can move around whole of the area - including the countries with vastly stricter regulations for migration.

- Digital euro as a backdoor to enforce transition to euro across the whole area, limiting the ways in which member states can dictate their own monetary policy. Digital euro must be accepted by all vendors across EU - even in the countries not using euro at all.

And that's ignoring slippery slope towards CDBC with expiration date.

- erosion of free speech and constant doublethink language, and noticing flaws in EU is undemocratic/euroskeptical(biggest sin possible) - even if it comes from "how to improve EU" point of view. or even if one points out that EU itself isn't democratic.

- double loyalty in case of politicians where there's a conflict between national and European interest. Do you pursue national benefit, or do you go against it in such cases and hop onto EU track - where there are plenty of unelected positions?

and also double loyalty in case of EC members - they should pursue good of all EU by their own charter, but there's no punishment nor anything systemic to discourage them from abusing their power and pursuing national interests.

All of those are minor or major flaws that slowly fracture EU. And by this point I don't think the system can be reformed.
Xelbair
·14 дней назад·discuss
the problem is that EU has no way for citizens/voters to actually purge those bad individuals.
Xelbair
·14 дней назад·discuss
which speaks volumes about either EU overstepping it's bounds as an entity, or is severely lacking checks and balances.
Xelbair
·14 дней назад·discuss
>Lets say the primary force we need to prevent is russian influence campaigns that back and push far right nationalists who will destabilize democracy. Is that a sufficient reason for controls?

No. Because if you solve underlying tensions in society the so called russian propaganda has nothing to take hold on.

Also who and under what rules will decide which propaganda is allowed? is American propaganda fine? Chinese? Japanese? UAE?

Not only this creates dissident, and suppresses voices critical of current government. but also gives extraordinary power on level of soviet union to current government.

You might trust current EU to not abuse it, but it might take a single elections, or single term for un-elected(!) officials in EC for attidute to change.

Just like in US - a lot of powers were granted but suddenly there's a person willing to abuse them.

For that to be even considered in EU we would need a lot more check and balances - especially for European Comission and Council.

Another issue is - is EU a trade union or federation? if former - this is outside of EU's responsiblities and powers. if later - look at point above.

If you really wanted to solve this problem you would go after advertisers and data collection companies, and regulate them.
Xelbair
·22 дня назад·discuss
>both sides
Xelbair
·2 месяца назад·discuss
>It doesn't answer the question of "what do we do about parents that don't do their job properly."

Like with normal cases - have court go over this.

But decision if any form of age lock should be implemented or not is up to parents. You cannot just shift argument to "you HAVE to restrict children from internet or else!"
Xelbair
·2 месяца назад·discuss
>They've essentially gotten roped into maintaining a huge chunk of internet infrastructure, for free

Just because they don't charge you directly, doesn’t matter it's not profitable for them.
Xelbair
·3 месяца назад·discuss
or cyclists should have their own lanes, pedestrians shouldn't walk on them - and vice versa. and if you're stuck behind someone slow just overtake them when you can.

Safe or not - it is up to individual to decide if it is worth the risk.
Xelbair
·3 месяца назад·discuss
I hate this approach to them problem, because it is not a technical problem.

Because it focuses on technical aspects and accepts the premise of 'age verification must be solved'. It doesn’t, and discretion what content and and what age children and teenagers can consume should be up to parents.

Not government, nor corporations.
Xelbair
·3 месяца назад·discuss
the issue isn't fines themselves

it's the fact that fines are part of agency's income and it is their best interest(as a bureaucratic agency) to keep them at highest level where companies will still pay them.

Effectively this makes this a tax, enshittifying everything even worse.

if fines were decoupled from agencies, and had exponentially rising curve for repeat offenses, i think that would work better than ban, as much i would prefer for them to get banned.
Xelbair
·3 месяца назад·discuss
Why?

why would we need to fund and make Europen Alternative to Surveilance (tm) when we could just you know - not have it at all?
Xelbair
·4 месяца назад·discuss
they wouldn't wait an hour either.
Xelbair
·4 месяца назад·discuss
>Right, I would argue they are part of technology, because bureaucracy clearly is, laws move in scope of what's possible and economically feasible, and culture is entirely downstream of that.

then you’re using different definition that everyone else, and bring nothing into discussion other than confusion.

>Or, put another way, you cannot "just change culture"

it isn't shaped just by technology. There are economic factors and cultural exchanges between different cultures.

This is purely tautological line of thinking, that brings nothing to discussion.
Xelbair
·4 месяца назад·discuss
ever heard of things like laws? like culture? like changing procedures instead of means?

unless you want to argue semantics and go 'actually they're all part of technology', but that makes your argument even less meaningful.
Xelbair
·4 месяца назад·discuss
Because this does not address the problem at all. Or rather - it does not address my problems as a citizen, and it just pushes responsibility of parents onto 3rd parties and punishes everyone collectively for it.

Also fundamentally speaking - this does just take away your right to privacy. do you just let your rights be taken away?

I don't want 'minimization' of intrusion of privacy, i want no intrusion of privacy.
Xelbair
·4 месяца назад·discuss
I wish it was decade for me, in early 2010s they were still teaching 90s approach to handling complex projects(upfront design, with custom DSL for each project and fully modelled by BA without any contact with actual users, with domain experts being siloed away - and all of that connected to codegen tools for xml from the 90s)
Xelbair
·4 месяца назад·discuss
Congratulations, you've put subscription on running red lights.
Xelbair
·4 месяца назад·discuss
Exactly the same way as i do now for such laws.

It's pointless, does not increase security, does increase complexity of every interaction, and introduces a lot of weird edge cases.

What i want is full anonymity enshrined in law, while at the same time giving parents, not governments, but parents, options to limit what their children can do on the internet.
Xelbair
·5 месяцев назад·discuss
Web is already mostly centralized, and corporations which should be scrutinized in way they handle security, PII and overall software issues are without oversight.

It is also a matter of respect towards professionals. If civil engineer says that something is illegal/dangerous/unfeasible their word is taken into the account and not dismissed - unlike in, broadly speaking, IT.
Xelbair
·5 месяцев назад·discuss
No, because it isn't something that should be up to google's control.