Ammettiamolo: nel mondo dell’Information Technology (IT) e della Cyber Security, le 24 ore non sono uguali per tutti. La vera risorsa scarsa non è il tempo, ma il bandwidth del cervello.
Se ci sentiamo costantemente sotto assedio, se la nostra giornata è una corsa reattiva da un alert urgente all’altro, abbiamo un problema di architettura cognitiva, non di gestione del tempo.
La differenza tra un team sovraccarico che naviga a vista e un team chirurgico e ad alto impatto non sta negli tool di ultima generazione, ma nel loro sistema operativo interno.
È ora di smettere di rincorrere l’illusione della “gestione del tempo” e di iniziare a padroneggiare ciò che conta davvero: il nostro focus e la nostra energia cognitiva.
Esploriamo come passare dalla RAM satura alla lucidità operativa, trasformando la gestione del rischio da una reazione stanca a una strategia deliberata.
Quando l’allarme è solo rumore
Il risultato del sovraccarico è l’Alert Fatigue. È la condizione per cui l’esposizione cronica a False Positive ci porta a desensibilizzarci.
Quando il True Positive arriva in una coda di 99 avvisi irrilevanti, la nostra velocità di reazione non è più determinata dalla nostra skill, ma dalla nostra tolleranza alla frustrazione e dalla nostra attenzione esaurita.
Urgenza vs. Rischio di Impatto
La vecchia matrice urgente/importante non funziona più perché ogni cosa “importante” è quasi sempre anche “urgente”.
Cosa possiamo fare per riprendere il controllo?
Dobbiamo smettere di sentirci responsabili per tutti i task e concentrarci principalmente sulle Critical Few (le poche cose critiche ed essenziali).
Applichiamo quindi il Principio di Pareto (80/20) e domandiamoci:
Quali 20% di task o vulnerability possono mitigare l’80% del rischio complessivo?
Ogni mattina, identifichiamo le nostre 3 attività che, se completate, avranno il massimo impatto sulla nostra giornata e sul rischio aziendale.
Se abbiamo completato solo quelle, la nostra giornata è stata comunque un successo, indipendentemente dal resto della To-Do List.
Deep Work: la VPN mentale per la concentrazione
Il nostro valore non è nel lavoro superficiale (Shallow Work – rispondere a email e chat), ma nel Deep Work.
Il Deep Work (lavoro profondo) è lo stato di concentrazione senza distrazioni che spinge le nostre capacità cognitive al limite e crea nuovo valore.
Stop al Multitasking: un mito distruttivo!
Ogni volta che saltiamo da un task all’altro, il nostro cervello paga un costo di switching.
La parte di noi che decide (la corteccia prefrontale) si stanca e lascia una residual attention (attenzione residua), come una tab del browser rimasta aperta in background che ci rallenta.
Dobbiamo creare una VPN mentale per il nostro Deep Work:
Time Boxing: prenotiamo blocchi di tempo non negoziabili nel nostro calendar.
Isolamento Rituale: durante il Time Box, chiudiamo Outlook. Ci stiamo letteralmente disconnettendo dal rumore per connetterci al segnale.
Ego Depletion: ogni scelta svuota la batteria
Ogni decisione, dalla scelta della colazione alla prioritizzazione di un patching, consuma energia (questo è l’Ego Depletion).
Automatizziamo o deleghiamo il più possibile le micro-decisioni (es. l’ordine delle email, i processi di workflow standard).
Conserviamo l’energia per le macro-decisioni critiche (es.incident response complesso, analisi strategica, zero-day).
La padronanza del nostro sistema
Smettiamo di credere di poter hackerare il tempo!
Non possiamo aggiungere ore al giorno, ma possiamo aggiungere qualità al nostro focus.
Nel mondo Cyber/IT, la nostra vera architettura di sicurezza non è solo la nostra suite di tool o il nostro firewall,
è la stabilità e la lucidità della nostra mente!
Se siamo costantemente reattivi, saturi di alert e stanchi, siamo un sistema operativo con risorse insufficienti e un obiettivo facile per chiunque debba eseguire un exploit.
Il professionista resiliente, invece, ha il controllo sui suoi input (le distrazioni) e sui suoi processi (il Deep Work), garantendo che la risorsa più critica di tutte ossia il suo capitale cognitivo sia sempre on target.
La padronanza operativa inizia con la padronanza di sé!
Ecco 3 domande essenziali per applicare subito un fix al nostro sistema operativo personale:
Analisi del Rischio : quali sono le 3 attività a massimo impatto che, se eseguite in Deep Work questa settimana, ridurranno significativamente un rischio o sbloccheranno un valore critico?
Ottimizzazione della RAM : quale singola micro-decisione o task ripetitivo potremmo documentare e delegare/automatizzare subito per liberare il nostro cervello dal “rumore di fondo” decisionale?
Resilienza Operativa : trattiamo il nostro sonno e le nostre pause come un requisito operativo o come un optional?
Airbus ha annunciato il richiamo di circa 6.500 aeromobili A320 a causa di potenziali guasti al sistema di controllo ELAC causati da potenti brillamenti solari. Il richiamo è avvenuto in seguito a un’improvvisa perdita di quota durante un volo da Cancún, in Messico, a Newark, che ha causato un atterraggio di emergenza e 15 passeggeri feriti.
Secondo Reuters , la decisione di richiamare l’aereo è stata presa in seguito a un’indagine sull’incidente che ha coinvolto il JetBlue A320. L’indagine ha stabilito che l’incidente è stato causato dalla risposta errata del sottosistema ELAC alle intense eruzioni solari.
Di conseguenza, il sistema ha interpretato erroneamente i movimenti della colonna di controllo. Il produttore ha raccomandato di ripristinare l’aggiornamento software L104 alla versione precedente o di sostituire il modulo di elaborazione.
Oltre 6.000 aeromobili A320 sono interessati dal richiamo. Lufthansa, IndiGo, easyJet, JetBlue, American Airlines e Air France sono state costrette a mettere a terra una parte significativa delle loro flotte, causando ritardi e cancellazioni diffuse durante il fine settimana. La sola Air France ha cancellato 35 voli sabato.
Nel frattempo, IndiGo, easyJet, JetBlue e American Airlines hanno ripristinato in modo indipendente l’aggiornamento problematico: l’operazione ha richiesto solo poche ore, evitando qualsiasi interruzione dei loro programmi.
Solo gli aerei più vecchi necessitano della sostituzione del modulo computer. Secondo una fonte del settore RBC, sembrerebbe che gli aerei della Federazione russa sono immuni a questo problema.
Perchè? l’“immunità” degli A320 russi è dovuta al fatto che il loro software non è stato aggiornato dal 2022 a causa delle sanzioni. Il problematico aggiornamento L104 è stato rilasciato solo nel 2024.”
Il secondo giorno del Papa a Libano è denso di impegni. La giornata è cominciata con la visita al Monastero di San Maroun ad Annaya, dove il Papa ha pregato sulla tomba di San Charbel, il monaco eremita canonizzato da Paolo VI nel 1977, e ha portato …
“Oggi vogliamo affidare all’intercessione di San Charbel le necessità della Chiesa, del Libano e del mondo”. Lo ha detto il Papa, nel saluto durante la visita al monastero di San Maroun ad Annaya, con cui è iniziato il suo secondo giorno in Libano.
“Rendo grazie a Dio che mi ha concesso di venire pellegrino alla tomba di San Charbel. I miei Predecessori – penso specialmente a San Paolo VI, che lo ha beatificato e canonizzato – l’avrebbero tanto desiderato”.
“Ogni visita del Santo Padre mobilita il Paese che lo ospita. Il Papa arriva in Libano che vive un periodo difficile e complicato. Siamo tormentati per il futuro del nostro Paese. È una visita che significa tantissimo.
Keith Jarrett – The Köln Concert: Cinquant’anni dopo la nascita di un classico senza genere. freezonemagazine.com/articoli/… Almeno tre, quattro volte l’anno, specie nei momenti in cui lo stato di ansia e il pessimismo cosmico mi prendono in ostaggio, mi ascolto il Concerto di Colonia del grande pianista di Allentown. Il potere omeopatico della musica vince sempre e dopo l’ascolto tutto torna a posto. Ma, sorvolando il fatto personale che poco interesserà
Safari Sarajevo: il confine tra civiltà e barbarie non è geografico è morale. freezonemagazine.com/articoli/… “La guerra vicina, quella con cui possiamo interloquire tutti i giorni, non con cartelli e appelli ma frequentandone le vittime, ci mette in discussione, rende precaria la nostra convivenza perché svela l’inconsistenza dei fondamenti su cui si fonda. Se non abbiamo fermato tutto questo a che serve ciò
OpenAI, un’azienda valutata circa 500 miliardi di dollari, si trova ad affrontare una concorrenza tecnica sempre più agguerrita. L’ultima versione di Gemini 3 di Google, in particolare, supera GPT-5 di OpenAI in diverse aree.
“Il mondo di oggi è profondamente diverso dalla situazione di due anni fa, quando OpenAI era più avanti di tutti gli altri”, ha dichiarato al Financial Times Thomas Wolf, co-fondatore e direttore scientifico della piattaforma di intelligenza artificiale Hugging Face.
Lo stesso CEO di OpenAI, Sam Altman, ha recentemente ammesso in una nota trapelata al personale che l’azienda deve prepararsi a un periodo di intensa concorrenza.
Solo un anno fa, la posizione di Google sembrava meno favorevole, ma dopo la conferenza degli sviluppatori di maggio e il lancio dello strumento fotografico Nano Banana, il numero di utenti mensili dell’app Gemini è salito da 400 milioni a 650 milioni. Tuttavia, questa crescita non sembra procedere in modo graduale. Nel frattempo, la capitalizzazione di mercato di Alphabet si avvicina ai 4.000 miliardi di dollari.
Sebbene OpenAI vanti circa 800 milioni di utenti settimanali, i dati dello strumento di analisi Similarweb, secondo il Financial Times, mostrano che le persone ora trascorrono più tempo su Gemini che su ChatGPT. La sfida principale di OpenAI risiede nel generare entrate sufficienti, potenzialmente attraverso l’integrazione pubblicitaria e l’espansione della sua base di abbonati.
Un vantaggio fondamentale per Google: l’azienda ha addestrato Gemini 3 utilizzando i propri chip Tensor Processing Unit invece di affidarsi all’hardware Nvidia. “Questo approccio completamente integrato tra hardware e software ci consente di raggiungere consumatori, clienti e aziende su questa scala “, ha dichiarato al Financial Times Koray Kavukcuoglu, architetto AI di Google e CTO di DeepMind.
Parallelamente, Anthropic, fondata nel 2021 da ex dipendenti di OpenAI, sta costruendo una solida attività imprenditoriale.
L’azienda sta raccogliendo capitali per una valutazione prevista di circa 300 miliardi di dollari. Secondo il Financial Times, il chatbot Claude è particolarmente apprezzato dai clienti aziendali nel settore della programmazione
Sarà una tappa molto significativa quella di Papa Leone XIV al Monastero di San Maroun ad Annaya, dove pregherà sulla tomba di San Charbel Makhlouf, conosciuto da molti come il “Padre Pio libanese”.
If you own a handheld transceiver of any type then the chances are it will come with a “rubber duck” style antenna. These flexible rubber-coated antennas are a compromise in performance, being significantly smaller than a wavelength at their frequency of operation. [OM40ET] has an interesting video in which he investigates this by tearing down a cheap rubber duck antenna and an even cheaper fake.
These antennas usually have a flexible upper section and a bulge at the bottom over the connector. The fake one has nothing in the bulge except the antenna wire and thus has a very high SWR, while the “real” one has a loading coil. This coil is an interesting design, because it’s designed such that the antenna has two resonant points at the 2 metre and 70 centimetre amateur bands. On paper it’s a tapped coil fed at the tap through a capacitor for matching, but a more detailed appraisal will tell you that the two halves of the coil are designed to return those two resonances. It’s still a not-very-good antenna, but the fact that it works at all is something.
If you want something better at VHF and haven’t got much space, all is not lost. We recently featured a VHF magnetic loop.
A nove mesi dall’entrata in vigore del Digital Operational Resilience Act (DORA), il settore finanziario europeo si trova di fronte a una sfida cruciale: garantire una resilienza dei dati all’altezza delle nuove normative. Secondo un recente sondaggio di Veeamcondotto da Censuswide, il 96% delle organizzazioni finanziarie in EMEA ammette che il proprio livello di resilienza non è ancora sufficiente per soddisfare i requisiti imposti dal regolamento europeo.
La normativa DORA, entrata in vigore a gennaio 2025, nasce con l’obiettivo di rafforzare la sicurezza digitale e la continuità operativa delle istituzioni finanziarie, in un contesto in cui le minacce informatiche sono sempre più sofisticate e pervasive. Eppure, nonostante il 94% delle aziende intervistate dichiari di attribuire oggi a DORA una priorità maggiore rispetto al passato, il percorso verso la piena conformità è tutt’altro che concluso.
Cybersecurity sotto pressione
Il regolamento ha avuto un impatto diretto sui team IT e di sicurezza: il 41% delle organizzazioni segnala un aumento dello stress e della pressione interna, mentre il 37% deve affrontare costi crescenti imposti dai fornitori ICT. A ciò si aggiunge un dato preoccupante: il 20% delle aziende non ha ancora ottenuto il budget necessario per implementare le misure richieste dalla normativa DORA.
In questo scenario, la cybersecurity diventa il pilastro su cui costruire una vera resilienza operativa. Non si tratta solo di proteggere i dati, ma di garantire che siano sempre disponibili, recuperabili e sicuri, anche in caso di attacco o interruzione. La “resilienza radicale” promossa da Veeam si fonda proprio su questo principio: offrire soluzioni in grado di integrare backup, ripristino, portabilità e intelligence, in ambienti cloud, virtuali, fisici, SaaS e Kubernetes.
Le lacune da colmare
Il sondaggio evidenzia come molte organizzazioni siano ancora lontane dal soddisfare alcuni requisiti fondamentali del DORA. Il 24% non ha avviato test di continuità operativa, né implementato procedure di segnalazione degli incidenti. Il 21% non ha ancora garantito l’integrità dei backup e il recupero sicuro dei dati e il 34% considera la gestione del rischio dei fornitori terzi il requisito più difficile da implementare, a causa della scarsa visibilità sulle supply chain e della complessità delle reti esterne.
Secondo Alessio di Benedetto, Country Manager di Veeam Software Italia, “La normativa DORA ha acceso i riflettori sulla necessità di una resilienza operativa concreta. In Italia, molte aziende stanno ancora cercando di colmare il divario tra conformità e protezione reale. In Veeam crediamo che la cybersecurity debba essere al centro di questa trasformazione: non solo per difendere i dati, ma per garantirne disponibilità e ripristino immediato. È il momento di andare oltre il backup tradizionale e costruire una resilienza digitale duratura“.
È qui che la cybersecurity assume un ruolo strategico: non solo come strumento di protezione, ma come leva per una governance più consapevole e integrata.
Verso una resilienza informatica duratura
La normativa DORA non è solo una questione di conformità, ma un’occasione per ripensare laresilienza informatica. Le organizzazioni che sapranno investirvi, puntando su cybersecurity e data protection avanzata, saranno le più pronte ad affrontare le sfide future.
L’iniziativa “Veeam è Molto di Più” invita aziende e professionisti ad andare oltre il semplice backup e considerarlo non più come una semplice copia dei dati, ma come pilastro strategico per garantire continuità, sicurezza e agilità del business. La vera resilienza nasce dalla capacità diripristinare rapidamente sistemi e ambienti, di gestire laportabilità dei dati tra cloud, infrastrutture virtuali e container, e diproteggerli con soluzioni sicure, immutabili e crittografate. In un modello dicloud ibrido, che unisce flessibilità e controllo, la resilienza dei dati diventa così una necessità strategica per assicurare la continuità operativa in un mondo in cui le interruzioni non sono più l’eccezione, ma la norma.
Digital Omnibus – A Single Rulebook or a License to Trespass Fundamental Rights?
What is Digital Omnibus?
Digital policy lobbies across the European Union are buzzing with one word: Digital Omnibus, a proposal aimed at consolidating and simplifying the existing EU digital framework. The idea, according to the proposal’s advocates, is to reduce overlap in obligations and the compliance burden on businesses.
Clarifying GDPR concepts such as pseudonymised vs non-personal data
Allowing limited use of sensitive data for detecting AI bias
Adjusting some obligations under the AI Act and delaying certain requirements
Creating a European Business Wallet for corporate digital identities
Merging various data laws into a more unified Data Act
Introducing a single entry point for cybersecurity incident reporting
These are framed as efficiency measures, cost-reduction initiatives, and efforts to make Europe more attractive to digital innovation.
Critics Warn: What Does Streamlining Actually Mean for OurRights?
For policymakers looking at the issue from strictly a business perspective, the digital Omnibus is a proposal long overdue. But as with any sweeping reform, the details matter, and this is where the debate becomes intense.
This is where concerns sharpen, especially among civil society groups, privacy advocates, and parties committed to defending digital freedoms such as the European Pirates.
European Digital Rights (EDRI) and other Digital rights advocates warn that simplifying the rulebook will come with a quiet erosion of our rights that were hard-won over the past decade.
Key Concerns Raised Against the Digital Omnibus
1. Roll-Back of Digital Protection Laws
The Omnibus is seen as reopening and weakening major protections, including the GDPR, ePrivacy, and the AI Act. This is viewed as a blow to the decades of work on digital rights.
2. Weakening of ePrivacy Rules
According to EDRi, the proposal would shift some “device access” rules from ePrivacy into GDPR, reducing mandatory consent in some cases. It is feared that this could permit tracking on devices without users’ explicit approval.
3. Narrowing the Definition of “Personal Data”
A redefinition of personal data could give companies more leeway to process information. Critics argue that this redefinition could reduce transparency and control for individuals.
4. Undermining AI Accountability
According to TechPolicy.Press article, amendments that give AI providers too much discretion, including a loophole that allows them to opt out of certain “high-risk” obligations without publicly declaring it. Rights groups argue this removes a key transparency check, weakening the AI Act’s purpose of managing risk.
5. Privileging Business Over People
Supporters of digital rights strongly believe that these reforms will shift power toward companies, thereby reducing individuals’ leverage under data protection laws. Precisely, these reforms have corporate interests as their focal point rather than citizens’ rights.
6. Weak Democratic Process
The way Omnibus is being fast-tracked with limited consultation and impact assessment, EDRi and others argue that such sweeping changes deserve more thorough democratic scrutiny.
7. Risk to Minoritised and Vulnerable Groups
EDRi highlights that under the proposed changes, marginalised communities could face a higher risk of profiling or automated discrimination. Reduced oversight and transparency could make it harder to challenge unfair or biased automated decisions.
So, Where Does This Leave Us?
For the European Pirates, the question is not whether Europe should innovate, but how. Efficiency cannot come at the cost of loosening the protections that set the EU apart in the global digital landscape.
The Digital Omnibus, on the surface, may appear to be an effort to overcome the hurdles that impede the EU’s innovation and growth. However, the implications of this proposal have far-reaching consequences from a social perspective.
The debate around the Digital Omnibus is only beginning. What is at stake is the balance between modernising Europe’s digital framework and guarding the rights of the people who live within it.
Across Europe, a new concept known as chat scanning has entered the public debate. Supporters claim it will protect children from online harm. Chat control is formally part of the Child Sexual Abuse Regulation (CSAR), aimed at combating CSAM (child sexual abuse material). However, many experts, privacy groups, and digital rights advocates warn that it poses a greater risk for everyone who uses a phone, especially young people who message daily.
What is chat scanning?
In simple terms, it is a system that checks your private messages before or as soon as you send them. The app you use would need to scan your texts, photos, or videos and determine whether they seem suspicious. If the scanner thinks something is “unsafe,” it can report the sender, even if the message was completely innocent.
This means the scanning occurs within your phone, not on a server elsewhere. Every typed or uploaded message is checked before it reaches a friend or family member. It is like having a digital security guard watching over your shoulder every time you write something personal.
For digital rights advocates, including the Pirate Party, this raises a serious concern: privacy is not something that can be switched on and off. Once a system is built to monitor everyone’s conversations, it becomes a permanent gateway to surveillance. It does not take much for such tools to be expanded, misused, or accessed by actors who do not have the public’s interest at heart.
Why Chat Control Is a Real Threat
Chat control systems are not theoretical risks. Automated scanners genuinely make mistakes. They often cannot understand teenage slang, humour, or personal images. A tool meant to protect vulnerable users can easily turn into one that falsely accuses innocent people. Meanwhile, determined bad actors can simply switch to apps that do not follow these rules, while ordinary citizens remain under constant monitoring.
This approach also weakens secure communication. End-to-end encryption is designed to protect everyone from hackers, identity theft, and even misuse of state power. Scanning messages before they are encrypted breaks that protection. Instead of keeping society safe, it exposes activists, families, journalists, and children to new dangers.
The Ripple Effect on Democracy
If chat controls become law with a full majority, the long-term consequences could spread slowly but deeply. The ripple effect would impact multiple pillars of democracy.
Privacy Erosion
What begins as limited scanning to target harmful content can gradually expand to include most users. When every message is subject to scrutiny, personal privacy is the first casualty.
Overwhelmed Law Enforcement
A flood of false positives would strain police resources. German experts who reviewed the proposal warned that law enforcement would be unable to handle the volume of inaccurate reports. This waste of time and energy increases the risk of people being wrongly investigated or prosecuted, ultimately making the public less safe.
Chilling of Free Expression
Journalists, activists, and vulnerable groups may start to self-censor because they no longer trust their communication channels. When private conversations feel monitored, open dialogue becomes rare.
Decline in Civic Participation
As trust in institutions weakens, people may disengage from democratic processes. Press freedom declines, and political debate becomes less open.
Shift in Social Norms
Over time, society may begin to accept the idea that monitoring private digital spaces is normal. Such a shift can alter the social contract itself, making surveillance an everyday expectation rather than an exception.
This is how a policy introduced in the name of protection can gradually erode the foundations of democracy.
Are there safer alternatives?
There are better ways to keep communities safe. Targeted investigations, stronger reporting channels, improved child protection services, and investment in digital literacy can genuinely support vulnerable groups without breaking the fundamental right to private communication.
Europe should not accept a future where every phone becomes a checkpoint. Safety should be built on rights, not surveillance. Protecting children and protecting privacy are not opposing goals. With smart policy and responsible technology, the EU can and must do both.
The drive to protect minors online has been gaining momentum in recent years and is now making its mark in global policy circles. This shift, strongly supported by public sentiment, has also reached the European Union.
In a recent development, Members of the European Parliament, as part of the Internal Market and Consumer Protection Committee, approved a report raising serious concerns about the shortcomings of major online platforms in safeguarding minors. With 32 votes in favour, the Committee highlighted growing worries over issues such as online addiction, mental health impacts, and children’s exposure to illegal or harmful digital content.
What Is In The Report
The report discusses the creation of frameworks and systems to support age verification and protect children’s rights and privacy online. This calls for a significant push to incorporate safety measures as an integral part of the system’s design, within a social responsibility framework, to make the internet a safe environment for minors.
MEPs have proposed sixteen years as the minimum age for children to access social media, video-sharing platforms, and AI-based chat companions. Children below sixteen can access the above-mentioned platforms with parental permission. However, a proposal has been put forth demanding that an absolute minimum age of thirteen be set. This indicates that children under 13 cannot access or use social media platforms, even with parental permission.
In Short:
Under 13 years of age: Not allowed on social media
13-15 years of age: Allowed with parents’ approval
16 years and above: Can use freely, no consent required
MEPs recommended stricter actions against non-compliance with the Digital Services Act (DSA). Stricter actions range from holding the senior executives of the platforms responsible for breaches of security affecting minors to imposing huge fines.
The recommendations include banning addictive design features and engagement-driven algorithms, removing gambling-style elements in games, and ending the monetisation of minors as influencers. They also call for tighter control over AI tools that create fake or explicit content and stronger rules against manipulative chatbots.
What Do Reports And Research Say?
The operative smoothness and convenience introduced by the digital and technological advancements over the last two decades have changed how the world works and communicates. The internet provides a level field for everyone to connect, learn, and make an impact. However, the privacy of internet users and the access to and control over data are points of contention and a constant topic of debate. With an increasing percentage of minor users globally, the magnitude of risks has been multiplied. Lack or limited awareness of understanding of digital boundaries and the deceptive nature of the online environment make minors more susceptible to the dangers. Exposure to inappropriate content, cyberbullying, financial scams, identity theft, and manipulation through social media or gaming platforms are a few risks to begin with. Their curiosity to explore beyond boundaries often makes minors easy targets for online predators.
Recent studies have made the following observations (the studies are EU-relevant):
According to the Internet Watch Foundation Annual Data & Insights / 2024 (reported 2025 releases), Record levels of child sexual abuse imagery were discovered in 2024; IWF actioned 291,273 reports and found 62% of identified child sexual abuse webpages were hosted in EU countries.
WeProtect Global Alliance Global Threat Assessment 2023 (relevant to the EU) reported an 87% increase in child sexual abuse material since 2019. Rapid grooming on social gaming platforms and emerging threats from AI-generated sexual abuse material are the new patterns of online exploitation.
According to WHO/Europe HBSC Volume on Bullying & Peer Violence (2024), one in six school-aged children (around 15-16%) experienced cyberbullying in 2022, a rise from previous survey rounds.
These reports indicate the alarming situation regarding minors’ safety and reflect the urgency with which the Committee is advancing its recommendations. Voting is due on the 23rd-24th of November, 2025.
While these reports underline the scale of the threat, they also raise an important question: are current solutions, like age verification, truly effective?
How Foolproof Is Age Verification As A Measure?
The primary concern in promoting age verification as a defence mechanism against cybercrime is the authenticity of those verification processes and whether they are robust enough to eliminate unethical practices targeting users. For instance, if the respondent (user) provides inaccurate information during the age verification process, are there any mechanisms in place to verify its accuracy?
Additionally, implementing age verification for children is next to impossible without violating the rights to privacy and free speech of adults, raising the question of who shall have access to and control over users’ data – Government bodies or big tech companies. Has “maintenance of anonymity” while providing data been given enough thought in drafting these policies? This is a matter of concern.
According to EDRI, a leading European Digital Rights NGO, deploying age verification as a measure to tackle multiple forms of cybercrime against minors is not a new policy. Reportedly, social media platforms were made to adopt similar measures in 2009. However, the problem still exists. Age verification as a countermeasure to cybercrime against minors is a superficial fix. Do the Commission’s safety guidelines address the root cause of the problem – a toxic online environment – is an important question to answer.
EDRI’s Key arguments:
Age verification is not a solution to problems of toxic platform design, such as addictive features and manipulative algorithms.
It restricts children’s rights to access information and express themselves, rather than empowering them.
It can exclude or discriminate against users without digital IDs or access to verification tools.
Lawmakers are focusing on exclusion instead of systemic reform — creating safer, fairer online spaces for everyone.
True protection lies in platform accountability and ethical design, not mass surveillance or one-size-fits-all age gates.
Before floating any policy into the periphery of execution, weighing the positive and negative user experiences is pivotal, because a blanket policy based on age brackets might make it ineffective at mitigating the risks of an unsafe online space. Here, educating and empowering both parents and children with digital literacy can have a more profound and meaningful impact rather than simply regulating age brackets. Change always comes with informed choices.
You do research on a product, maybe a pair of shoes, a gadget, or a flight ticket. And all of a sudden, every other ad on your screen is a copy of the same. It is easy and convenient to get over it – until you stop to think: how come the internet knows me so well?
This is not how the periphery of an algorithm works, but a systematically curated process designed to influence user behaviour, shaping not just what we buy, but how we think and choose.
As Europe now discusses “digital sovereignty,” it’s worth asking: who truly holds the reins of your digital life—you, your government, or the tech giants?
A recent article by Politico explains how France and Germany, in alliance with the United States, are championing a “sovereign digital transition,” the idea that Europe must reduce its dependence on foreign Big Tech giants and establish its own technological foundations. On paper, it appears to be a bold step toward autonomy. In practice, however, citizens across Europe are asking: What does this mean for me, my data, my digital life? (archive.ph/k7Nyz)
The Promise of a European Stack – What’s at Stake?
The ambition is high: from sovereign cloud infrastructure to home-grown AI and chip design, the goal is a Europe where tech is owned, governed, and secured by Europeans. But this raises significant questions. Who controls these platforms? Are they built for citizen empowerment or just national-industrial competition? Is “sovereignty” being framed as freedom, or as new walls around users’ data and digital behaviours?
Ground-Level Reality: Data, Dependence, and Digital Discomfort
Commuters from the EU are receiving fines from London’s ULEZ zone even though they never drove there. The cross-border data sharing behind that fine is not some distant regulation—it’s a personal intrusion. (Source: Guardian – theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/j…? | archive.ph/s9EBF)
DataReportal’s “Digital 2025: Online Privacy Concerns” section highlights that in Europe, the number of connected adults worried about how companies use their personal data is a meaningful trend (although slightly down from previous years). (Source: Dataportal – datareportal.com/reports/digit… | archive.ph/vOwZp )
A case where the European Commission was ordered to compensate a citizen for improperly transferring his personal data outside the EU, illustrating how even high-level institutions can breach data-protection rights. (Source: Brussels Signal – brusselssignal.eu/2025/01/eu-c… | archive.ph/bN5lF)
These stories illustrate that what starts as “digital sovereignty” in high-level Brussels dialogue ends up in your bank records, your home, and your social feed.
Where Sovereignty Risks Turning Into Surveillance
According to the Politico piece, Europe’s push to take control of its tech stack is partly a response to U.S. dominance. But replacing one system with another raises the same concerns:
Will European infrastructure keep privacy at the centre, or will it become just another corporate/state-controlled ecosystem?
When national or bloc-level systems enforce age checks, data localization, and surveillance capabilities, will citizens gain freedom or lose it?
The Pirate Perspective: Tech for People, Not Power
For the European Pirates Party, the question isn’t whether Europe should build tech. It’s how and for whom. True sovereignty starts with the user’s choice, not just the state’s contracts and cloud servers.
Digital freedom means:
Transparent platforms where citizens can inspect how their data is used.
User-controlled infrastructure, where opting out isn’t a penalty.
Open standards and interoperability, rather than locked-in systems that create new dependencies.
Governance by citizens, not just by ministers or industrial lobbyists.
What It Means For You
Ask: Who owns the cloud where your photos are stored? If Europe builds its own stack, will you still have the right to move your data freely?
Watch for: Platforms that claim “European control” but push the same manipulative algorithms and business models as before.
Insist on: User education and choice because no matter how sovereign the tech gets, if you don’t understand it, you are still powerless.
Final Word
Europe’s digital sovereignty drive is exciting and potentially transformative. Europe’s digital sovereignty drive is exciting and potentially transformative. However, if it continues without electing citizens to govern, we risk establishing a “sovereign tech” environment that denies users authority.
The Pirates’ message is unmistakable: sovereignty devoid of popular authority is merely another form of reliance. Let’s ensure that users, not tech companies or anyone else, own the data revolution.
The Netherlands once again finds itself at a political crossroads. Less than two years after a coalition government collapsed under the weight of internal tensions, Dutch voters are preparing to decide what kind of leadership they want for their future.
On the 29th of October, Dutch people will be going to the polls to elect a new Tweede Kamer (Dutch lower house). Initially, the next elections were scheduled for 2028, but due to the fall of the 2024 cabinet, snap elections were called for.
On the 3rd of June, Geert Wilders, leader of the far-right conservative party PVV (Party for Freedom), walked away from the coalition due to different views on asylum policies. The cabinet led by Dick Schoof as prime minister ended with his resignation. The upcoming elections thus pose an opportunity for voters to shape the composition of their parliament anew.
The elections held in November 2023 led to talks that concluded in 2024, with the coalition appointing the independent Schoof as prime minister. The coalition was formed by the Party for Freedom (PVV), the largest party in the House of Representatives, with the People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD), New Social Contract (NSC), and the Farmer–Citizen Movement (BBB). The coalition was marked by its delicate nature and Wilders’ inability to converse with his fellow coalition members, often alienating them due to his narrow, inflexible views on migration, asylum, and social policies.
As the elections approach, a first debate was held on the 12th of October. It was expected that the populist nature of Wilders would take centre stage; however, he withdrew from the campaign and did not participate in the debate. [Earlier in the week, he had been mentioned in the list of targets of a terrorist group, and so, for security reasons, he decided not to participate in the debate, even after the group had been arrested, security had confirmed it to be safe, and possibilities for venue changes and online allocations were suggested.] In his absence, the leader of D66 (Democracy 66), Rob Jetten, joined in his place.
The debate featured Dilan Yeşilgöz, the leader of VVD (People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy, a conservative-liberal party), Henri Bontenb from CDA (Christian Democratic Appeal), Frans Timmermans from the recently combined GroenLinks-PvdA party (social democracy, green politics), and Rob Jetten. Key debate topics included asylum policies, how to address the current housing crisis, health care practices, and issues in Gaza. Despite party leaders fixating on the language of the debate rather than the policy proposals and personal attacks, the key topics of the election agenda were raised.
Given Wilders’ absence from this weekend’s debate, other party leaders had the opportunity to present their positions more prominently. This offers a hopeful outlook, as his strongly right-aligned views were not the focal point, allowing voters to engage with other perspectives. Considering Wilders’ rigid stance on migration during the previous government, he may have alienated not only other parties but also segments of his own voter base.
According to polling conducted at the beginning of October (ipsos-publiek.nl/actueel/ipsos…), support for the PVV has declined compared to 2023, yet it remains the most popular party. The most notable change is the decline in support for the VVD and NSC, two former coalition parties. It is also key to highlight the rise in support for CDA, a party that has previously stated its preference to work with the VVD rather than the PVV. The shifting popularity of some parties from the previous coalition may signal a potential change in the composition of the next one. This could be encouraging news: the Netherlands might see a government more centrally aligned in its social and immigration policies and more open to dialogue. While the left and more progressive parties have yet to gain significant momentum (including the Dutch Pirate Party), there remains a possibility for a more moderate, centre-right coalition to emerge (rather than the previous extreme-right one).
With Dutch voters heading to the polls at the end of the month, there is still room for public opinion to evolve and for parties to rethink their alliances. For the moment, there is a cautious hope that the next Dutch government may take a more moderate path.
So how are our Dutch Pirate Party colleagues faring?
"Ik ben fractievoorzitter in het Waterschap Amstel, Gooi en Vecht en heb een achtergrond op het gebied van Kunstmatige Intelligentie.
De Piratenpartij staat voor een vrije democratie waarin iedereen direct toegang heeft tot alle kennis, kunst en cultuur. We investeren in publieke voorzieningen zoals betaalbare woningen, zorg en onderwijs. We vertrouwen elkaar en hebben een gezond wantrouwen tegenover de macht van overheden en bedrijven."
"Het ondersteunen van burgerrechten, directe democratie, databeveiliging, bescherming van persoonsgegevens, transparantie, vrijheid van kennis en informatie, goed toegankelijke onderwijs, universele gezondheidszorg en een stabiel basisinkomen. Dit zijn exact de steken die het huidige kabinet heeft laten vallen!
Daar waar anderen weg lopen, ga ik de strijd aan. Bij de Piratenpartij voel ik daadkracht en integriteit."
Ik ben geboren en wonende in Eindhoven en programmeur van beroep.
Binnen de campagne ben ik iemand die zorgt dat drempels voor activiteiten worden weggenomen in plaats van opgeworpen. Met mijn ervaringen binnen de Piratenpartij help ik ideeën van nieuwe actieve leden tot daadwerkelijke acties te brengen, en ben ik een bron van kennis op het gebied van acties die we in het verleden gedaan hebben.
"Om mezelf recht in de spiegel aan te kunnen kijken, in de hoop op een leven waarvan de balans tussen geven en nemen doorslaat naar meer coöperatie – en daarmee het onderling vertrouwen, verkies ik in ieder opzicht partnerschap. Daarom kies ik voor de partij met de programmapunten die het beste in ons naar boven halen, zoals de invoering van een universeel basisinkomen en de bevrijding van informatie.
"Wat ik vooral belangrijk vind is ervoor zorgen dat er in onze maatschappij internationale solidariteit is en dat er respectvol omgekeken wordt naar mensen in zwakkere posities, zoals bijv jongeren met een vluchtverleden.
Duurzaamheid, corporate sociaal responsibility, mensenrechten, armoedebestrijding en een weerbare digitale samenleving is waar ik me voor wil inzetten. En minder polarisatie graag, ook in de media."
"Ik ben 42 jaar en werkzaam in verschillende sectoren: zorg, kinderopvang en sociaal werk.
Er zijn heel veel dingen die veel beter kunnen in Nederland. Zorg, onderwijs, onderdak en voedselzekerheid zijn cruciaal en ik zal hier dan ook voor strijden. Ik zou namelijk graag in een land willen wonen waar niemand achterblijft en we Nederland eindelijk echt een welvarend land kunnen noemen."
"Vanuit mijn werk als maatschappelijk werker en psychosociaal therapeut zie ik dat de zorg, zowel medisch als het geestelijk welzijn in de knel is geraakt door het huidige beleid. Door de systemen en de macht van de grotere organisaties mis ik de menselijke maat, die men juist nodig heeft als men om hulp vraagt en zich kwetsbaar voelt.
Als ervaringsdeskundige loopt Angeline zelf ook tegen allerlei hindernissen aan, zoals bij de WMO
"Ik ben een functionaris gegevensbescherming bij de overheid met een missie: zorgen dat organisaties niet als rovers omgaan met persoonsgegevens. Privacy en ethiek horen bovenaan de mast.
Ik vaar ook een koers als ondernemer: met mijn handel Hook Solutions verkoop ik haken voor huis, tuin en keuken, en Kapitein Haak-artikelen. Met mijn achternaam kan ik onmogelijk níet met de Piratenpartij meevaren."
"Ik ben sinds 2022 stadsdeelcommissielid in Amsterdam-Noord. Mijn speerpunten zijn behoud van het groen, directe democratie, privacy en sociale verbinding.
Daarnaast ben ik onderzoeker en schrijver.
Ik ben enthousiast, heb een duidelijke mening, kan tegelijkertijd goed samenwerken en de kar trekken. Ik ben kandidaat voor de Piratenpartij, omdat ik denk dat ik goed in staat ben om de partij een gezicht te geven.
"Als software-ontwikkelaar wil ik vrij kennis kunnen delen op het internet. Die vrijheid wordt bedreigd door BigTech. Om monopoliemacht te krijgen misbruiken ze softwarepatenten en auteursrechten.
Monopolievorming speelt niet alleen online, maar in de hele samenleving. We willen vrijheid om mee te doen met de economie en lokale zeggenschap."
Als moeder van kinderen met bijzondere behoeften zet ik me in voor de rechten van personen met een handicap. Ons land voldoet niet aan internationale verdragen zoals de VN-verdragen Handicap en Inzake de Rechten van het Kind.
Mijn prioriteit is om de meest ernstige misstanden in de zorg te bestrijden. Ik pleit voor het aanstellen van een functionerende autoriteit boven de instellingen en organisaties, om menswaardige zorg te waarborgen.
"Veel mensen kennen mij van de markt, uit de zorg, als tegelzetter of goochelaar. Ik heb in elke uithoek van de maatschappij gewerkt.
Sinds 2020 ben ik actief voor de Piratenpartij. Twee jaar lang was ik met veel plezier partijvoorzitter. Er is moed nodig om de huidige problemen op te lossen. Denk aan doorgeslagen bureaucratie, corruptie, inbreuk op privacy van burgers, non-transparantie, milieuvervuiling, ongelijke machtsverhoudingen."
Langetijdpiraat, idealist, en een groot voorstander van gelijkwaardigheid en vrijheid.
"Kennis moet gedeeld kunnen worden anders kan ze niet groeien. Daarbij willen wij kennis kunnen nemen van wat de overheid doet en welke verbindingen er bestaan tussen de overheid en het bedrijfsleven. Wij willen meer privacy voor burgers en transparantie van die overheid en bedrijven.
"Ik kom uit Rotterdam en werk bij Lely waar ik 600+ ontwikkelaars ondersteun bij het bouwen van software.
Ik concentreer me op wat ik het recht op bezit noem. Met name software wordt zodanig geleverd dat het bedrijf achter het product bepaalt hoe, waar en hoelang je hun product mag gebruiken. Het liefst met grove inbreuk op je privacy."
"Ik ben natuurkundige en heb lange tijd als onderzoeker in het ziekenhuis gewerkt. Daar zag ik grote problemen met veilige data-opslag en uitwisseling van gegevens.
Tegenwoordig ben ik docent op een middelbare school in Amsterdam. Ik geef natuurkunde, natuur leven & technologie, en informatica aan vooral de bovenbouw leerlingen Mavo, Havo en VWO."
We stellen de komende dagen alle kandidaten voor, startend bij nr. 33, onze lijstduwer Metje Blaak:
Wat haar aantrekt in de Piratenpartij is “je leven leiden zo als jij dat wilt”.
"Eigenlijk doe ik dat mijn hele leven al. Vandaar dat ik me graag aansluit bij de Piratenpartij, ook zodat ieder vrij is om zich te ontwikkelen en toegang heeft tot techniek en cultuur; of je nou zo arm als een kerkrat bent of rijk."
Mensen zijn de grote drijfveer in mijn leven; eerst als buschauffeur, nu als conciërge op de Hogeschool Arnhem Nijmegen.
Als Piraat verzet ik mij tegen de inperkingen van onze vrijheden. In een ideale samenleving is informatie zo vrij en veel mogelijk beschikbaar voor ons allemaal, kan iedereen anoniem en privé communiceren, is er weinig surveillance en bespaart legalisering en regulering van drugs inzet van politiecapaciteit.
Goof is 36 en zet zich al jaren in als gemeenteraadslid in Doetinchem.
"Als ambulant begeleider in de zorg en werkzaam bij een opvang voor dakloze jongeren heb ik dagelijks te maken met de uitdagingen waarmee mensen in moeilijke situaties worden geconfronteerd. Mijn hart ligt bij degenen die het meest kwetsbaar zijn in onze samenleving, en ik geloof dat we als partij een verschil kunnen maken door voor hen op te komen."
Eskild, ICT’er en vader. Zijn centrale strijdpunten zijn de bescherming van digitale burgerrechten en online privacy voor alle burgers. Hij pleit ervoor dat betrouwbaar breedbandinternet een betaalbare nutsvoorziening wordt. Wikkeling wil dat overheden digitale mogelijkheden beter benutten om het leven van burgers te vereenvoudigen, bijvoorbeeld door het schrappen van overbodige formulieren.
"Ik ben commissielid in Waterschap Amstel- Gooi en Vecht. Na zovele jaren uitkleden van zorg, sociale voorzieningen, drama’s als met de Toeslagenaffaire, vluchtelingen, covid, Groningen, etc. is er, nu gelukkig een nieuwe kans en kunnen we alles op alles zetten om onze thema’s eindelijk naar Den Haag te brengen."
Ook actief bij ATD Vierde Wereld, Stoere Vrouwen, Milieudefensie, Transnational Institute en SOMO,
Dylan is een maker in de brede zin van het woord: dus van realtime calculated 3D-graphics tot lasershows en van lichteffecten tot hardcore tekno.
"In dit proces loop je onherroepelijk tegen juridische grenzen aan van wat wel en niet toegestaan is. Dit is een mijnenveld. De huidige copyrightwetgeving belemmert creativiteit, terwijl deze juist was opgezet om creativiteit te bevorderen."
Peter is al ruim 10 jaar lid van de Piratenpartij en woont in de mooie in Kerkrade.
Hij is ruim 20 jaar geluidtechnicus geweest en daarna journalist en fotograaf voor de jongerensite van Landgraaf en heeft onder andere ook in de Wsw-raad gezeten.
Tegenwoordig maakt hij nog steeds in zijn vrije tijd foto’s onder het creative common licentie model, schrijft wordpress plugins, maakt wordpress templates en werkt als operator in Gronsveld. piratenpartij.nl/kandidaten-tk…
"Geloven in vrijheid en autonomie vooronderstelt dat je het individu vertrouwt en daarom beschermt tegen bemoeienis van de autoriteiten.
Voor een Piraat is de vrije uitwisseling van informatie en ideeën nog steeds essentieel om onzin en onbegrip de wereld uit te helpen – die uitwisseling wordt niet opeens een gevaarlijke bron van desinformatie en extremisme omdat ze zich online afspeelt. Daarom pleiten we zo hard tegen censuur en voor privacy online".
Ron Smit (1964) heeft de opleiding Informatica Technologie aan de universiteit in Amsterdam gevolgd. Hij is mede-oprichter van de Basisinkomen Partij in 2013. Ron onderzoekt nieuwe technologische ontwikkelingen in de wetenschap en is ook radiozendamateur (piraat).
"Tussen 1990 en 1994 was ik raadslid in stadsdeel de Pijp. Ik woon nu in de Rivierenbuurt en zet me nog steeds in voor een leefbare buurt. Directe communicatie, dialogen en samenwerking met geestverwanten."
"Ik vind dat de regering bewoners meer kansen moet aanreiken om macht in eigen handen te kunnen nemen wanneer het niet goed gaat in buurten of wijken."
"Als advocaat en ex-wethouder vecht ik voor jouw digitale rechten. Voor transparantie en de digitale underdog.
Als Piraat wil ik opkomen voor de digitale burgerrechten van iedereen en met mijn juridische kennis wil ik helpen aan het ontwikkelen en realiseren van die digitale burgerrechten. Mét de Piratenpartij zal ik bijdragen aan die digitale empowerment."
ma esattamente quando la meloni sostiene che la violenza va sempre condannata, quando a proprio danno, intende anche violenze del genere esposto nell'articolo accluso?
Spinto da questo toot dei @Devol ⁂ (che ringrazio), ho deciso di andare un po' più in là nella mia degooglizzazione. Non posso rimuovere del tutto google ddalla mia vita, ma mi sono detto almeno voglio avvicinarmi il più possibile, un passo alla volta.
La premessa da fare è che non conoscevo molte delle soluzioni indicate nel toot, quindi è un'ulteriore riprova (se mai ce ne fosse bisogno), che la conoscenza è potere --> diffondiamo il più possibile!
Ho messo #lineageos nel mio vecchio Redmi Note 10 Pro, che stavo letteralmente per buttare in pattumiera: si bloccava continuamente, andava a scatti, la batteria non durava più molto. Del resto è questo a cui ci hanno abituati; a buttare l'hardware ogni 3 anni al massimo per comprarlo nuovo. In questo caso, quel dispositivo era stato particolarmente sfortunato perché la stessa Xiaomi l'aveva ucciso dopo sole 2 versioni di android e 3 anni scarsi di vita, chiudendo il rubinetto degli aggiornamenti.
Con Lineage OS, a 2 anni di distanza dall'ultimo aggiornamento rilasciato, ho riportato a nuova vita il dispositivo. Senza più il peso di tutta la spazzatura di Google e Xiaomi, quell'hardware è tornato a far girare android 16 (uscito quest'anno) e per di più in maniera estremamente fluida, comparabile a un google pixel nuovo. La batteria dura di più, e posso anche dire che sono più tranquillo dal punto di vista della sicurezza (è sempre meglio avere software aggiornato).
Ho installato anche il play store, ma sinceramente non conto di usarlo: sto usando F-Droid per le app open source (ne userò il più possibile) e per tutto il resto c'è Aurora store, che si interfaccia con il play store di google ma con un dispositivo "virtuale", quindi in maniera anonima. Potrò anche beneficiare degli aggiornamenti molto più frequenti rispetto al nulla a cui mi aveva condannato Xiaomi/Redmi.
Insomma, al posto di un hardware ancora valido ma inutilizzabile, mi rtrovo un secondo cellulare che è tornato come nuovo, e che potrò usare come riserva o come compagno per i miei viaggi (è sempre utile avere con sé un secondo dispositivo da usare nel caso in cui si perda il primo).
L'installazione non è stata difficilissima per me che sono un utente avanzato, ma di per sé non è complicatissima: se si conosce un minimo di inglese, il sito di Lineage Os spiega passo passo cosa fare.
La parte più complicata, tutto sommato, è stata quella di sbloccare il dispositivo Xiaomi: l'azienda non mette a disposizione il software aggiornato per farlo, quello sul sito lineage è un po' vecchiotto, e anche una volta che si è reperito in rete la versione aggiornata, Xiaomi ti fa aspettare una settimana di calendario!
Superato questo ostacolo, è stato facile.
Insomma, ancora una volta grazie all'opensource e a chi ne ha diffuso la conoscenza.
Liberi dal monopolio di Google: devol.it e la rivoluzione della deGooglizzazione
Il movimento DeGoogle (in italiano “degooglizzazione”) invita utenti e cittadinə a uscire dalla gabbia digitale di Google.
Con OpenAi che fa incetta di memorie volatili le altre aziende che non hanno scorte adeguate rischiano ora una forte esposizione agli shock del mercato che ha visto le Dram aumentare del 170 per cento in 12 mesi. Microsoft sarebbe
per quale motivo dovrebbe essere un problema sostenere che l'ingiustizia genera violenza? è un dato di fatto. non si può avere pace senza giustizia, come non si più combattere la violenza senza combattere anche l'ingiustizia.
Israele è alla resa dei conti con sé stesso, una grazia a Netanyahu sarebbe la picconata finale a quel poco che resta della democrazia israeliana, un "no" porterebbe ad un regolamento di conti istituzionale da cui comunique Israele uscirebbe moribondo.
Credo che l'idea di uno stato in cui tutti gli ebrei possano vivere sicuri sia al tramonto. Israele si avvia ad essere uno stato riservato agli ebrei più estremisti, per tutti gli altri non ci sarà più posto.
Da Israele alla Francia, ci sono episodi allarmanti di un aumento del controllo e della sorveglianza, e di una limitazione degli spazi di dibattito. Leggi
In uno degli ultimi episodi del Ben & Marc Show, i fondatori della nota società di investimento (Marc) Andreessen (Ben) Horowitz orientano la discussione, assieme ad altri tre partners, su un tema a loro molto caro: le caratteristiche peculiari dell’ecosistema tech americano e le sue capacità di rafforzare le fondamenta
Secondo il premio Nobel per l'economia nel 2001 Michael Spence, sebbene l'intelligenza artificiale richieda un accesso affidabile all'elettricità e a Internet mobile, una volta risolti questi problemi, permetterà ai paesi emergenti in Africa e Asia di recuperare
In teoria, Chat Control avrebbe dovuto essere sepolto il mese scorso. Il minaccioso piano dell'UE di scansionare in massa i messaggi privati dei cittadini ha incontrato una schiacciante resistenza pubblica in Germania, con il governo del paese che si è rifiutato di approvarlo. Ma Bruxelles raramente si tira indietro solo perché i cittadini lo chiedono. E così, fedele alla sua forma, una versione rielaborata del testo è già in fase di elaborazione, questa volta nascosta, a porte chiuse.
Qualsiasi programma per computer può essere progettato per essere eseguito da un singolo file, se la progettazione è abbastanza sbagliata! 🤣
Volevo creare il server #Fediverse più semplice possibile, che potesse essere utilizzato come strumento didattico per mostrare come funziona ActivityPub / Mastodon.
Any computer program can be designed to run from a single file if you architect it wrong enough!
I wanted to create the simplest possible Fediverse server which can be used as an educational tool to show how ActivityPub / Mastodon works.
The design goals were:
Upload a single PHP file to the server.
No databases or separate config files.
Single Actor (i.e. not multi-user).
Allow the Actor to be followed.
Post plain-text messages to followers.
Be roughly standards compliant.
And those goals have all been met! Check it out on GitLab. I warn you though, it is the nadir of bad coding. There are no tests, bugger-all security, scalability isn't considered, and it is a mess. But it works.
You can follow the test user @[url=https://example.viii.fi/example]example@example.viii.fi[/url]
Firstly, I've slightly cheated on my "single file" stipulation. There's an .htaccess file which turns example.com/whatever into example.com/index.php?path=whatever
The index.php file then takes that path and does stuff. It also contains all the configuration variables which is very bad practice.
Rather than using a database, it saves files to disk.
Again, this is not suitable for any real world use. This is an educational tool to help explain the basics of posting messages to the Fediverse. It requires absolutely no dependencies. You do not need to spin up a dockerised hypervisor to manage your node bundles and re-compile everything to WASM. Just FTP the file up to prod and you're done.
This is where you set up your account's name and bio. You also need to provide a public/private keypair. The posting page is protected with a password that also needs to be set here. PHP // Set up the Actor's information $username = rawurlencode("example"); // Encoded as it is often used as part of a URl $realName = "E. Xample. Jr."; $summary = "Some text about the user."; $server = $_SERVER["SERVER_NAME"]; // Domain name this is hosted on // Generate locally or from cryptotools.net/rsagen // Newlines must be replaced with "\n" $key_private = "-----BEGIN RSA PRIVATE KEY-----\n...\n-----END RSA PRIVATE KEY-----"; $key_public = "-----BEGIN PUBLIC KEY-----\n...\n-----END PUBLIC KEY-----"; // Password for sending messages $password = "P4ssW0rd";
ActivityPub is a "chatty" protocol. This takes all the requests your server receives and saves them in /logs/ as a datestamped text file. PHP // Get all headers and requests sent to this server $headers = print_r( getallheaders(), true ); $postData = print_r( $_POST, true ); $getData = print_r( $_GET, true ); $filesData = print_r( $_FILES, true ); $body = json_decode( file_get_contents( "php://input" ), true ); $bodyData = print_r( $body, true ); $requestData = print_r( $_REQUEST, true ); $serverData = print_r( $_SERVER, true ); // Get the type of request - used in the log filename if ( isset( $body["type"] ) ) { $type = " " . $body["type"]; } else { $type = ""; } // Create a timestamp in ISO 8601 format for the filename $timestamp = date( "c" ); // Filename for the log $filename = "{$timestamp}{$type}.txt"; // Save headers and request data to the timestamped file in the logs directory if( ! is_dir( "logs" ) ) { mkdir( "logs"); } file_put_contents( "logs/{$filename}", "Headers: \n$headers \n\n" . "Body Data: \n$bodyData \n\n" . "POST Data: \n$postData \n\n" . "GET Data: \n$getData \n\n" . "Files Data: \n$filesData \n\n" . "Request Data:\n$requestData\n\n" . "Server Data: \n$serverData \n\n" );
The .htaccess changes /whatever to /?path=whateverThis runs the function of the path requested. PHP !empty( $_GET["path"] ) ? $path = $_GET["path"] : die(); switch ($path) { case ".well-known/webfinger": webfinger(); case rawurldecode( $username ): username(); case "following": following(); case "followers": followers(); case "inbox": inbox(); case "write": write(); case "send": send(); default: die(); }
The WebFinger Protocol is used to identify accounts.It is requested with example.com/.well-known/webfinger?resource=acct:username@example.comThis server only has one user, so it ignores the query string and always returns the same details. PHP function webfinger() { global $username, $server; $webfinger = array( "subject" => "acct:{$username}@{$server}", "links" => array( array( "rel" => "self", "type" => "application/activity+json", "href" => "https://{$server}/{$username}" ) ) ); header( "Content-Type: application/json" ); echo json_encode( $webfinger ); die(); }
These JSON documents show how many users are following / followers-of this account.The information here is self-attested. So you can lie and use any number you want. PHPfunction following() { global $server; $following = array( "@context" => "https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams", "id" => "https://{$server}/following", "type" => "Collection", "totalItems" => 0, "items" => [] ); header( "Content-Type: application/activity+json" ); echo json_encode( $following ); die(); } function followers() { global $server; $followers = array( "@context" => "https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams", "id" => "https://{$server}/followers", "type" => "Collection", "totalItems" => 0, "items" => [] ); header( "Content-Type: application/activity+json" ); echo json_encode( $followers ); die(); }
The /inbox is the main server. It receives all requests. This server only responds to "Follow" requests.A remote server sends a follow request which is a JSON file saying who they are.This code does not cryptographically validate the headers of the received message.The name of the remote user's server is saved to a file so that future messages can be delivered to it.An accept request is cryptographically signed and POST'd back to the remote server. PHP function inbox() { global $body, $server, $username, $key_private; // Get the message and type $inbox_message = $body; $inbox_type = $inbox_message["type"]; // This inbox only responds to follow requests if ( "Follow" != $inbox_type ) { die(); } // Get the parameters $inbox_id = $inbox_message["id"]; $inbox_actor = $inbox_message["actor"]; $inbox_host = parse_url( $inbox_actor, PHP_URL_HOST ); // Does this account have any followers? if( file_exists( "followers.json" ) ) { $followers_file = file_get_contents( "followers.json" ); $followers_json = json_decode( $followers_file, true ); } else { $followers_json = array(); } // Add user to list. Don't care about duplicate users, server is what's important $followers_json[$inbox_host]["users"][] = $inbox_actor; // Save the new followers file file_put_contents( "followers.json", print_r( json_encode( $followers_json ), true ) ); // Response Message ID // This isn't used for anything important so could just be a random number $guid = uuid(); // Create the Accept message $message = [ "@context" => "https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams", "id" => "https://{$server}/{$guid}", "type" => "Accept", "actor" => "https://{$server}/{$username}", "object" => [ "@context" => "https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams", "id" => $inbox_id, "type" => $inbox_type, "actor" => $inbox_actor, "object" => "https://{$server}/{$username}", ] ]; // The Accept is sent to the server of the user who requested the follow // TODO: The path doesn't *always* end with/inbox $host = $inbox_host; $path = parse_url( $inbox_actor, PHP_URL_PATH ) . "/inbox"; // Get the signed headers $headers = generate_signed_headers( $message, $host, $path ); // Specify the URL of the remote server's inbox // TODO: The path doesn't *always* end with /inbox $remoteServerUrl = $inbox_actor . "/inbox"; // POST the message and header to the requester's inbox $ch = curl_init( $remoteServerUrl ); curl_setopt( $ch, CURLOPT_RETURNTRANSFER, true ); curl_setopt( $ch, CURLOPT_CUSTOMREQUEST, "POST" ); curl_setopt( $ch, CURLOPT_POSTFIELDS, json_encode($message) ); curl_setopt( $ch, CURLOPT_HTTPHEADER, $headers ); $response = curl_exec( $ch ); // Check for errors if( curl_errno( $ch ) ) { file_put_contents( "error.txt", curl_error( $ch ) ); } curl_close($ch); die(); }
Every message sent should have a unique ID. This can be anything you like. Some servers use a random number.I prefer a date-sortable string. PHP function uuid() { return sprintf( "%08x-%04x-%04x-%04x-%012x", time(), mt_rand(0, 0xffff), mt_rand(0, 0xffff), mt_rand(0, 0x3fff) | 0x8000, mt_rand(0, 0xffffffffffff) ); }
Every message that your server sends needs to be cryptographically signed with your Private Key.This is a complicated process. Please read "How to make friends and verify requests" for more information. PHP function generate_signed_headers( $message, $host, $path ) { global $server, $username, $key_private; // Encode the message to JSON $message_json = json_encode( $message ); // Location of the Public Key $keyId = "https://{$server}/{$username}#main-key"; // Generate signing variables $hash = hash( "sha256", $message_json, true ); $digest = base64_encode( $hash ); $date = date( "D, d M Y H:i:s \G\M\T" ); // Get the Private Key $signer = openssl_get_privatekey( $key_private ); // Sign the path, host, date, and digest $stringToSign = "(request-target): post $path\nhost: $host\ndate: $date\ndigest: SHA-256=$digest"; // The signing function returns the variable $signature // php.net/manual/en/function.ope… openssl_sign( $stringToSign, $signature, $signer, OPENSSL_ALGO_SHA256 ); // Encode the signature $signature_b64 = base64_encode( $signature ); // Full signature header $signature_header = 'keyId="' . $keyId . '",algorithm="rsa-sha256",headers="(request-target) host date digest",signature="' . $signature_b64 . '"'; // Header for POST reply $headers = array( "Host: {$host}", "Date: {$date}", "Digest: SHA-256={$digest}", "Signature: {$signature_header}", "Content-Type: application/activity+json", "Accept: application/activity+json", ); return $headers; }
This creates a basic HTML form. Type in your message and your password. It then POSTs the data to the /send endpoint. PHP function write() { // Display an HTML form for the user to enter a message.echo <<< HTML<![url=https://mastodon.social/users/doctype]Aleks Dorohovich[/url] html><html lang="en-GB"> <head> <meta charset="UTF-8"> <title>Send Message</title> <style> *{font-family:sans-serif;font-size:1.1em;} </style> </head> <body> <form action="/send" method="post" enctype="multipart/form-data"> <label for="content">Your message:</label><br> <textarea id="content" name="content" rows="5" cols="32"></textarea><br> <label for="password">Password</label><br> <input type="password" name="password" id="password" size="32"><br> <input type="submit" value="Post Message"> </form> </body></html>HTML; die(); }
This takes the submitted message and checks the password is correct.It reads the followers.json file and sends the message to every server that is following this account. PHP function send() { global $password, $server, $username, $key_private; // Does the posted password match the stored password? if( $password != $_POST["password"] ) { die(); } // Get the posted content $content = $_POST["content"]; // Current time - ISO8601 $timestamp = date( "c" ); // Outgoing Message ID $guid = uuid(); // Construct the Note // contentMap is used to prevent unnecessary "translate this post" pop ups // hardcoded to English $note = [ "@context" => array( "https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams" ), "id" => "https://{$server}/posts/{$guid}.json", "type" => "Note", "published" => $timestamp, "attributedTo" => "https://{$server}/{$username}", "content" => $content, "contentMap" => ["en" => $content], "to" => ["https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"] ]; // Construct the Message $message = [ "@context" => "https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams", "id" => "https://{$server}/posts/{$guid}.json", "type" => "Create", "actor" => "https://{$server}/{$username}", "to" => [ "https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public" ], "cc" => [ "https://{$server}/followers" ], "object" => $note ]; // Create the context for the permalink $note = [ "@context" => "https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams", ...$note ]; // Save the permalink $note_json = json_encode( $note ); // Check for posts/ directory and create it if( ! is_dir( "posts" ) ) { mkdir( "posts"); } file_put_contents( "posts/{$guid}.json", print_r( $note_json, true ) ); // Read existing users and get their hosts $followers_file = file_get_contents( "followers.json" ); $followers_json = json_decode( $followers_file, true ); $hosts = array_keys( $followers_json ); // Prepare to use the multiple cURL handle $mh = curl_multi_init(); // Loop through all the severs of the followers // Each server needs its own cURL handle // Each POST to an inbox needs to be signed separately foreach ( $hosts as $host ) { $path = "/inbox"; // Get the signed headers $headers = generate_signed_headers( $message, $host, $path ); // Specify the URL of the remote server $remoteServerUrl = "https://{$host}{$path}"; // POST the message and header to the requester's inbox $ch = curl_init( $remoteServerUrl ); curl_setopt( $ch, CURLOPT_RETURNTRANSFER, true ); curl_setopt( $ch, CURLOPT_CUSTOMREQUEST, "POST" ); curl_setopt( $ch, CURLOPT_POSTFIELDS, json_encode($message) ); curl_setopt( $ch, CURLOPT_HTTPHEADER, $headers ); // Add the handle to the multi-handle curl_multi_add_handle( $mh, $ch ); } // Execute the multi-handle do { $status = curl_multi_exec( $mh, $active ); if ( $active ) { curl_multi_select( $mh ); } } while ( $active && $status == CURLM_OK ); // Close the multi-handle curl_multi_close( $mh ); // Render the JSON so the user can see the POST has worked header( "Location: https://{$server}/posts/{$guid}.json" ); die(); }
This is not intended to be used in production. Ever. But if you would like to contribute more simple examples of how the protocol works, please come and play on GitLab.
You can follow the test user @[url=https://example.viii.fi/example]example@example.viii.fi[/url]
Scientists found that major celebrities died four years earlier than their less famous peers, hinting that fame itself can be a mortality risk.#TheAbstract
Being Famous Can Shorten Your Lifespan, Scientists Find
Welcome back to the Abstract! Here are the studies this week that hit the books, bottled alien lightning, reared wolf cubs, and tallied the price of fame.
First, we’ve got a centuries-long history of an Indian savannah told through songs, folktales, and screaming peacocks. Then: Mars gets charged, the secrets of Stora Karlsö, and the epidemiology of stardom.
It has happened again: Researchers have turned to the annals of literature to address a scientific question. Longtime readers of the Abstract will recall that this is a simply irresistible category of research to me (see: China’s porpoise corpus, Transylvanian weather reports, and milky seas). To the library!
In this edition of Science from the Stacks, researchers probed the origins of the tropical savannah in western Maharashtra, India, by collecting references to plants in 28 stories and songs dating back at least 750 years. The aim was to reconstruct a vegetation history that could hint at shifts in the region between forest and savannah biomes.
“Ttraditional literature—for example, myths, folk songs and stories—is a culturally resonant, yet underutilized line of evidence to understand ecological histories and foster biodiversity conservation,” said researchers led by Ashish N. Nerlekar of Michigan State University. A folio from an early 19th-century manuscript of the Bhaktavijaya mentioning the taraṭī tree. Image: Nerlekar, Ashish N. et al. “We found that descriptions of both the landscape and specific plants point to an open-canopy savanna in the past rather than a forest,” the team said. “Of the 44 wild plant species recorded (i.e. omitting exclusively cultivated plants), a clear majority (27 species) were savanna indicators, 14 were generalists, and only three were forest indicators. Our ecological reconstructions from traditional literature complement data from archival paintings, revenue records, plant and animal fossils, and dated molecular phylogenies of endemic biodiversity—all attesting to the antiquity of India's savannas.”
It’s an out-of-the-box way to reconstruct the natural history of a region. But the highlights of these studies are always the excerpts from the literature, like the amazing origin story of this village:
“A folk tale illustrates the founding myth of Kolvihire village near Jejuri. The tale is about a robber-murderer named Vālhyā Koḷī, who lived near Kolvihire. Upon meeting a sage, Vālhyā Koḷī introspected on his wrongdoings and performed penance for 12 years. After completion of the penance, as a living testimony to Vālhyā Koḷī's sincere devotion, leaves sprouted from his stick, which he had used to hit and kill travellers to loot their money. Eventually, Vālhyā Koḷī became the sage-poet Vālmikī. According to the tale, the sprouted stick grew into a pāḍaḷa tree, and the tree still exists in Kolvihire.”
You have to love a good botanical redemption story. Another standout line is this memorable description of a thorny patch in the savannah from the early 16th century: “Such is this thorny forest | it is highly frightening | this forest is empty | peacocks scream here.”
I don’t know exactly why, but “peacocks scream here” is just about the scariest description I’ve ever heard of a place. Shout out to this ancient poet for capturing some legendary bad vibes.
Lightning is a big deal on Earth, inspiring awe, fear, and some of the naughtiest deities imaginable. But lightning also strikes on other planets, including Jupiter and Saturn. For years, scientists have suspected that Mars might host its own bolts, but detecting them has remained elusive.
Now, scientists have finally captured lightning on Mars thanks to “serendipitous observations” from the SuperCam microphone aboard the Perseverance rover.
“Fifty-five events have been detected over two Martian years, usually associated with dust devils and dust storm convective fronts,” said researchers led by Baptiste Chide of the Institut de Recherche en Astrophysique et Planétologie in Toulouse, France. “Beyond Mars, this work also reinforces the prospect of triboelectric discharges associated with wind-blown sediment on Venus and Titan.”
It goes to show that even a very dead world like Mars can still crackle and zap now and then.
About 4,000 years ago on a small island in the Baltic sea, people cared for two wolves — perhaps as pets — feeding them fish, seals, and other marine fare. That’s the cozy portrait presented in a new study that analyzed the remains of ancient wolves buried in the Stora Förvar cave on the Swedish island of Stora Karlsö.
While dogs are commonly buried at ancient human sites, wolves and humans rarely mix in the archaeological record. But the wolves at Stora Karlsö were unlikely to have reached the island without the aid of humans, and their primarily seafood diet—unusual for wild wolves—suggests they were also fed by people. Moreover, one of the animals suffered from a pathology that might have limited its mobility, hinting that it was kept alive by humans. The cave where the wolf remains were found. Image: Jan Storå/Stockholm University
The study presents the “possibility of prehistoric human control of wolves,” said researchers led by Linus Girdland-Flink of the University of Aberdeen. “Our results provide evidence that extends the discourse about past human–wolf interactions and relationships.”
Celebrity may literally be to die for, according to a new study that evaluated fame as a comorbidity.
Scientists collected a list of 324 big music stars active between 1950 and 1990, including Elvis Presley, Kurt Cobain, Sam Cooke, and Janis Joplin. Those heavy-hitters were then matched with 324 “twin” musicians that were not household names, but otherwise shared many characteristics of the celebs, including gender, nationality, genre, and roughly similar birth dates. The idea was to directly compare the lifespans of A-listers and B-listers to isolate the extent to which fame itself is a mortality risk factor, rather than the lifestyle of a musician.
The study suggests that famous singers die four years earlier, on average, compared to their B-list peers, demonstrating “a 33% higher mortality risk compared with less famous singers,” said researchers led by Johanna Hepp of the Central Institute of Mental Health in Mannheim, Germany. “This study provides new evidence suggesting that fame may be associated with increased mortality risk among musicians, beyond occupational factors.”
Lady Gaga had it right, as if there were ever any doubt: Under the glitz, the Fame Monster is always waiting.
A folio from an early 19th-century manuscript of the Bhaktavijaya mentioning the taraṭī tree. Image: Nerlekar, Ashish N. et al.
