![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/bec1d236-697b-4034-aad5-5f88f7028e96.png)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/db7182d9-181a-45e1-b0aa-6768f144911a.jpeg)
Can the current king please decree that we’re a democracy?
looking for replacements
r/anarchydnd
r/apolloapp
r/Condution
r/robotech
r/OSUOnlineCS
r/vintageobscura
r/ZeroCovidCommunitv
Can the current king please decree that we’re a democracy?
I hope it means the little blurb you included. I hate video posts with no summary, comment, or excerpt. When it’s just a link, I never click it. With the added info, I can decide if it’s worth my time. The title alone is never enough to temp me to watch.
… while claiming to be good Christians. Wouldn’t good Christians take pride in their stewardship of God’s creation?
Edit: You’re right. There, I’ve edited it for you.
I’m not sure of the point they’re trying to make.
CNN is carried on spectrum allotted to satellite television. The public could have our governments allot that for any use. There’s no reason it should only benefit media companies. Unless those companies are benefiting the public.
Even CNN sent through wires often travels through public land.
Given both of these, I see no reason CNN would need to air commercials during the presidential debate. Thats the point I’m trying to make.
If they are disagreeing with my main point, I give up and concede defeat. I see no point in trying to convince them anymore.
If they’re nitpicking that I said spectrum before knowing it was CNN, then perhaps they’re the one being shitty. But I honestly don’t know what their point is. Maybe it is to argue that CNN is a private company and requires advertising to stay profitable.
Okay, I’m convinced. They must run commercials. Edit: You’ve proven me wrong.
Yes cable television doesn’t use broadband spectrum, but it still relies on other public resources.
And satellite broadcasts do use spectrum allotted by the government, and CNN is carried on satellite.
Additionally, why are we allowing CNN to incorporate if it does not benefit society? The government shouldn’t be letting companies incorporate that only serve entirely their own interests.
Are cable lines entirely running through private land? Is CNN carried on a satellite television provider?
too true
Commercial Breaks
What the fuck?
Broadcasters are using public spectrum. They don’t need to make money off of this.
Not my country, but I think “Mayonaka no Door / Stay With Me” needs to be here.
The instrumentals version of this album is worth decking it, too.
I’m sure they’re counting on it being rather difficult to flee from most places in the U.S.
With no birth control or abortions, conception will become legally-binding marriage.
With its legislative proposal known as “Chat Control,” the EU Commission is trying to establish an unprecedented mass-surveillance apparatus of Orwellian proportions in the European Union. If EU citizens don’t stand up for privacy now, it may be too late.
This Wednesday, June 19, 2024, the EU Council could be voting on the controversial Chat Control bill. Should it pass, the consequences would be devastating: Under the pretext of child protection, EU citizens would no longer be able to communicate in a safe and private manner on the Internet. The European market’s location advantage would suffer a massive hit due to a substantial decrease in data security. And EU professionals like lawyers, journalists, and physicians could no longer uphold their duty to confidentiality online. All while children wouldn’t be better protected in the least bit. On the contrary, Chat Control could have a negative impact on minors in particular.
It doesn’t matter how the EU Commission is trying to sell it – as “client-side scanning,” “upload moderation,” or “AI detection” –, Chat Control is still mass surveillance. And regardless of its technical implementation, mass surveillance is always an incredibly bad idea, for a whole plethora of reasons. Here are just three:
1. Mass Surveillance is a Totalitarian Tool Incompatible with Democracy
2. Mass Surveillance Is Ineffective
3. Mass Surveillance Undermines Data Security
Of course, sharing CSAM is an absolutely intolerable, horrific crime that must be punished. Before CSAM can be shared online, however, a child must have suffered abuse in real life, which is what effective child protection should be trying to prevent (and what Chat Control does not focus on). For this and many other reasons, child protection organizations such as Germany’s Federal Child Protection Association are against Chat Control, arguing that it’s “neither proportionate nor effective.”
Besides, there’s no way of really knowing whether Chat Control would actually be (or remain) limited to CSAM. Once the mass-surveillance apparatus is installed, it could easily be extended to detect content other than CSAM without anyone noticing it. From a service provider’s point of view, the detection mechanism, which is created and maintained by third parties, essentially behaves like a black box.
Since the matter may be decided this Wednesday, June 19, 2024, time is a critical factor. If you’re a EU citizen, please consider contacting your government’s representative today, asking them to vote against Chat Control.
It may also help to take to the digital streets, spread the word online, and raise awareness for the EU’s dubious plan to establish an unprecedented mass-surveillance apparatus that would essentially nullify the right to data privacy and set a highly dangerous precedent in doing so.
While Threema would be subject to Chat Control, the business solution Threema Work would be out of scope according to our current knowledge. However it’s still not entirely clear how Chat Control would have to be implemented by service providers, and it’s questionable whether such a blatant violation of the right to privacy would hold up in European courts.
What is crystal clear, however, is that there will never be a Threema version that’s spying on its users in any way, shape, or form. The reason Threema was created is to provide a highly secure, completely private, and anonymous means of communication. Once it’s no longer possible to offer such a service in the European Union, we will be forced to take consequences.
We will carefully consider all options (including legal actions, technical workarounds, etc.) first, and if we come to the conclusion that there’s no other way, we’ll call on fellow communication services to join us in leaving the EU.
Not just UK. It’s a stupid term that organizations use in cybersecurity trainings but no one else uses.
Well that seems misguided. If both candidates will let the genocide happen, but one will also fuck everything else up, it seems like an easy choice.
I mean if Al is going to take over this country anyway, might as well be this one. Or the weird one.