I haven’t even read the article, and I already hate it just by the title. I shall now go and read the article itself. The primary reason I hate it already is because anything with crime is generally used to take away people’s liberty.
Idk man taking away peoples liberty to discriminate against people isn’t a bad thing IMHO.
Define “discriminate”.
To make distinctions on the basis of class or category without regard to individual merit, especially to show prejudice on the basis of ethnicity, gender, or a similar social factor.
Nope, going to need more than the American Heritage dictionary #2 definition from you on this one.
What does it mean to discriminate? What groups of people are protected from it under law? What are the penalties for it? In your own words and using your own thoughts.
Sounds like you just want to find the loop holes of doing a hate crime. Have a good day!
Sounds like you have no individual thought and default to personal attacks because you lack critical thinking skills.
I would return the pleasantry but you aren’t deserving of kind words considering the aforementioned personal attack.
Sure dawg. Just cause I dont like to be hate crimed I have no individual thought. Peace out dude. May you forever live in interesting times.
Thanks, I hate it. So, mission accomplished.
Just by looking at it I know for them cybercrime is ad-blocking and piracy. Meanwhile phone scams are the most common form of “”“cyber”“” crime and no one bats an eye on them.
The fact that the phone system hasn’t been overhauled to prevent spoofing is a sign of how little anyone actually gives a shit about helping people.
IANAL: It sounds like the EFF recommendation probably wouldn’t help prevent it from being used to investigate ad blocking and piracy:
Recommendation: Restrict the definition to “core cybercrimes” like technical attacks on computers, devices, data, and communications systems. Exclude human rights-protected activities from the scope of the treaty to prevent misuse and ensure these rights are not unjustly targeted due to equating cybercrime with any crime using ICT.
Since blocking ads and piracy aren’t likely to be directly related to human rights protected activities, and they’ll probably stretch the definition of “core cybercrimes” to include those…
Not only that they’ll probably start using all sorts of surveillance data that Google and Facebook etc. have for all sort of things that people don’t expect e.g. Maybe use GPS data to issue speeding tickets…
Counter-proposal: no.
So various cockroaches have realized that the concept of WWW threatens their monopoly on information allowing them to commit crimes, but, when neutered, makes them tenfold more powerful.
See, in the 90s all the court decisions, cultural and political moves and other stuff in favor of freedom of speech and such in the Web and in the Internet were based on old world principles applied to a new technology. With such a combination these would ruin parts of that old world, but it was the only realistic way.
In the 00s that part has realized that it’s going to the junkyard of history and decided to break the parts of old world which produced those principles, and make new ones for the Web and for itself.
That’s what all these big states and corps are doing right now. I mean, I’m serious, some things can be either a war or a massacre. The latter if you ignore them. The humanity as a whole is trying to start moving back into barbarism.
This is one of the worst CTA I had raed recently.
The link to their key concerns seems to be broken
That feature was hard to find though, had to search
cache:https://www.eff.org/files/2024/07/29/eff-treaty-un-pagers.pdfand apparently access to google cache is going away entirely soon, so I saved the google cache to the way back machine tooThank you, appreciate it!
