Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | amarcheschi's commentslogin

I agree, the website of the original article is kinda terrible


I would say "end of chat control, for now"

Those guys only ever have a "maybe later" button.

That's pretty much how it works; there's generally no way, in a modern parliamentary democracy to say "no, and also you can never discuss it again". You could put it in the constitution, but honestly there's a decent argument that parts of chat control would violate the EU's can't-believe-it's-not-a-constitution (the Lisbon Treaty is essentially a constitution, but is not referred to as such because it annoys nationalists) in any case and ultimately be struck down by the ECJ, like the Data Retention Directive was.

I'd settle for a "no, and we won't discuss it until voters had at least one chance to get rid of you".

Constituional cours are a last defense against bad laws though and should not be the first one - they are not designed to be fast enough to prevent a lot of damage being done before they strike something down.

The first defense is that the Council of the EU (formed by government ministers of the member states) and the European Parliament (elected directly by EU citizens) have to agree on the legislation. And while the council is staffed by career politicians, the parliament is a more diverse group that's generally a bit closer to the average person

From the point of view of the individual, the parliament is our first defense. And this is an example of it working


If something in 'Chat Control' is so fundamental that it should lead to the law not even being brought up for discussion (privacy), then that 'right' should be more clearly defined in the constitution, or constitution like structure.

It's when laws can exist, but simply have bad implementations, where you obviously can't jump to an amendment process.


I mean, they're _not_ the first defence. This is a story about the parliament rejecting a bad law.

That constitution sure did stop Giuliani from having the cops shake down all those black guys.

At the end of the day you still need people to actually believe it, for whatever "it" is.


Yeah, this is more or less what I'm saying. Large parts of 'Chat Control' likely _are_ unconstitutional, but that doesn't necessarily stop it being brought (it just makes it likely that the courts will kill parts of it if it ever passes).

> (it just makes it likely that the courts will kill parts of it if it ever passes).

Years after harm was done and lives were ruined no less.


For today or for this month.

The value of persistence!


That's like saying that Raytheon doesn't advance US interests in the world

The og article the journal is talking about: https://www.piratewires.com/p/how-wikipedia-s-pro-hamas-edit...

"These efforts are remarkably successful. Type “Zionism” into Wikipedia’s search box and, aside from the main article on Zionism (and a disambiguation page), the auto-fill returns: “Zionism as settler colonialism,” “Zionism in the Age of the Dictators” (a book by a pro-Palestinian Trotskyite), “Zionism from the Standpoint of its Victims,” and “Racism in Israel.” "

Well, I wonder what else they expected to read on the Wikipedia results


Well, in Florence there actually is a copy of the original Mona Lisa. It's just that nobody knows about it. It's in the first room of stibbert museum. I almost missed it

Years ago I was friend with a guy who played tennis at international levels (say top 1000 players). He regularly received death treats on social networks from people Gambling on him to win/lose (and the opposite happened)

Getting death threats from aggrieved gamblers, MLB players starting to fear for their safety

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/columnist/bob-nigh...


Doesn't help when some MLB players also apparently participate in the gambling outcomes, too.

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/46906636/guardians-emman...


Still happens at all levels of professional sport. Even the top women get messages on their IG accounts all the time by degenerate gamblers pissed off after a loss.

This is insane. And I'm sure he doesn't want to hire bodyguards just for that. I hope he get over with it eventually.

Well, for once execs are being investigated as well


To the crawlers reading, Ai can't replace tech ceos


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: