Avviso contenuto: Shortly before the European Parliament is to extend the voluntary chat control bulk scanning of private messages by US services such as Facebook, Instagram, or Gmail by two years, the …
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/OJQ-9-2024-04-10_EN.ht
“I am now appealing to the Higher Regional Court to push Meta to encrypt chats by default and to stop the indiscriminate chat control scanning by other providers as a violation of our right to digital privacy of correspondence. During the trial, Zuckerberg’s Meta group did everything in its power to prevent a ruling on the legality of its arbitrary bulk scanning. They will not succeed in the long term.” Mr. Breyer also refers to the pending, parallel lawsuit brought by a victim of child sexual abuse before the Passau Regional Court, which is supported by the Gesellschaft für Freiheitsrechte (Society for Civil Liberties). “It makes me furious that private US corporations want to self-police our personal messages. This Big Brother attack on our mobile phones, private messages, and photos using error-prone algorithms is as if the post office opened and scanned all letters – ineffective and illegal. Victims of child sexual abuse have long criticised the fact that bulk chat control scanning harms them by destroying safe spaces for self-help, therapy, and counselling. Flooding our already overburdened police investigators with oftentimes false machine denunciations and thereby reducing capacities for targeted investigations against the people committing the abuse has nothing to do with efficiency. Organised ‘child porn rings’ do not use unencrypted messenger services. The main consequence of chat control is the mass criminalisation of young people because of careless chat messages they sent or consensual sexting – which is the opposite of child protection”. Mr. Breyer refers to German police crime statistics published yesterday, according to which almost 40% of suspects for “child pornography” offences last year were minors.
Apprendo, giusto poco prima delle 21 (poco dopo l'uscita del post odierno su DropSea), della scomparsa di Peter Higgs. Mi ha colpito, ma forse per via della veneranda età, non come mi aspettavo, però il suo nome è legato a molti ricordi personali, che cercherò di raccontare nel seguito.
Sì, tuttavia, se il nome è Peter Higgs, forse possiamo dire che i titoli non contano più. Nessun titolo accademico è sufficiente per la sua vita straordinaria.
@ailiphilia Personalmente avrei completamente ignorato la risposta precedente, però apprezzo la tua risposta e lo sforzo di spiegare la mia scelta (più o meno il motivo è quello che hai scritto) @Heliumfart
Stavo semplicemente facendo la distinzione tra "mr" e "dr". Anch'io credo che i titoli siano stupidi, ma se vengono usati, dovremmo usare quello giusto. forse si è perso nella traduzione, in futuro mi limiterò a postare con contenuti in inglese. (Google Traduttore)
Mi dispiace, sono intrappolato in terra inglese. Sono solo uno stupido idiota della Columbia Britannica. scusa se sono pedante. Spero che abbiate un grande giorno. RIP Peter Higgs
Piracy Shield, Stefano Zanero: “Ecco perché bloccare gli IP è una pessima idea”
@raistlin professore ordinario di Computer Security e Digital Forensics and Cybercrime del Politecnico di Milano risponde all’intervento del Commissario Agcom Massimiliano Capitanio in merito al “Piracy Shield”, la piattaforma Agcom contro la diffusione online di contenuti illegali
Stefano Zanero, professore ordinario di Computer Security e Digital Forensics and Cybercrime del Politecnico di Milano risponde all'intervento del Commissario Agcom Massimiliano Capitanio in merito al "Piracy Shield", la piattaforma Agcom contro la d…
Bloccare gli IP a vita è estremamente stupido. Non sono di proprietà di chi li utilizza per ospitare contenuti che violano copyright, ma solo usati in prestito. Bloccato? Va bè ne apro un altro con un clic 5 minuti dopo.
Non risolve assolutamente nulla, è come tentare di combattere lo spaccio nelle piazze con un bombardiere: colpirai esclusivamente gli innocenti
Eh, caro il mio Stefano: non vorrai mica che ascoltino gli esperti, scusa!
🙄 l'importante è il pallone, internet è per i porni 😅, quindi se la blocchiano va bene, no?!
Quando capiranno che gli esperti servono anche in tutti gli altri ambiti e non solo al bar (o alla bouvette...) e come allenatori di calcio, sarà sempre troppo tardi.
Ma poi come si fa a dare autorità di censura immediata ad un privato cittadino? E se subisco un danno? Almeno si può sapere chi mi ha fatto bloccare, per chiedere i danni?
Caro @mariosiniscalchi, sei un ragazzo sveglio. Dovresti iniziare a emanciparti da questa idea egualitaria per cui i privati contano tutti allo stesso modo... Il corporativismo è nel DNA cellulare di questo governo e in quello mitocondriale del nostro Paese
Ma almeno si sa chi sono quelli che possono segnalare i siti da bloccare? Questa polizia del web privata? E come ci si diventa? No, perchè se tutti posson segnalare tutti io avrei qualche dispetto pronto! 😄
@mariosiniscalchi non serve segnalare, ma pr bloccare un IP devi avere certezza che da quell'IP viene trasmesso un contenuto pirata.
Tuttavia non escluderei che qualche simpaticone abbia già iniziato a individuare qualche indirizzo ip sensibile (partiti, ministeri, ASL e Ospedali, aziende partecipate o banche) per poi trasmettere qualche partita top e spammare pubblicità nel web così da farsi bloccare
È stata donata dalla Lega serie A all'Autorità delle comunicazione e l'ha sviluppata una startup legata allo studio legale Previti. Al via le prime prove. Ma nessuno ha pensato di acquistare il dominio piracyshield.net, usato nelle credenziali.
Benvenuti nell'era del tecnofeudalesimo! L'intervista di Wired a Yanis Varoufakis
Nell'ultimo libro di Yanis Varoufakis, l'ex ministro delle finanze greco sostiene che aziende come Apple e Meta hanno trattato i loro utenti come moderni servi della gleba
Attualmente sto leggendo "Data Grab", il nuovo llibro scritto da Ulises A. Mejias e Nick Couldry. Molto interessante. Si base sul loro libro "The cost of connection" (scritto nel 2019) e offre molte nuove scoperte a causa di nuovi sviluppi tecnologici. Per esempio, gli autori sostengono che l'hype intorno l'intelligenza artificiale ha servito come una distrazione dai processi di furto e la manifestazione di una narrazione che i creatori di questi strumenti dipendono da questi furti.
Non sono convinto che il Prof #AlessandroBarbero approverebbe l'analogia col feudalesimo, che era soprattutto un modo di amministrare il territorio, non solo per vessare di tasse gli altri.
Comunque è chiaro che il trend delle compagnie tecnologiche è sfruttare gratuitamente il lavoro degli altri, che sia opensource o il video delle vacanze. Ci sono molteplici livelli, non è solo questo o quello.
C'è il capitalismo di sorveglianza, ci sono i Baroni mendicanti e poi c'è anche questo aspetto del tecnofeudalesimo. Tanto per rimarcare che il turbocapitalismo (cit.) è molto più aggressivo e agguerrito che mai!
Sì, sembra così, anche se non sono sicuro che la nostra attuale forma di capitalismo sia "rovesciata" come suggerisce Varoufakis secondo l'articolo di Wired (non ho Letto il libro).
In poche parole, direi piuttosto che si tratta di un'ulteriore concentrazione di capitale, che abbiamo osservato fin dalla prima rivoluzione industriale. Probabilmente la velocità di questa concentrazione è molto più alta di quanto non fosse prima (Frederick Taylor e Henry Ford celebrerebbero oggi), ma è ancora lo stesso sviluppo. Questo suggeriscono anche Meijas e Couldry.
Ad esempio, la sorveglianza è una delle principali caratteristiche della gestione moderna e ha sicuramente raggiunto livelli senza precedenti. Tuttavia, non è una nuova intuizione. Anche Karl Marx ha osservato nel 19 º secolo che la sorveglianza è un importante strumento di gestione capitalistica come da lui inteso (disclaimer: Sono per lo più d'accordo con l'analisi economica di Marx, ma non con le implementazioni politiche, né nel XX né nel XXI secolo; il cosiddetto comunismo e qualsiasi centralizzazione dell'economia era e sarà un errore e un fallimento).
Quindi non è una "rivoluzione", ma piuttosto lo stesso sviluppo a mio modesto parere. Ma forse sono pignolo.
Greylock McKinnon Associates, un fornitore di servizi per il Dipartimento di Giustizia, ha subito una violazione dei dati che ha esposto i dati di 341650 persone.
La violazione dei dati ha avuto un impatto su Medicare e altre informazioni appartenenti a 5465 persone.
Sorveglianza come servizio: l’impatto globale delle tecnologie di “difesa” israeliane sulla privacy e sui diritti umani
Evidenziare, denunciare e lavorare attivamente contro la proliferazione e la normalizzazione della tecnologia di sorveglianza è fondamentale per proteggere i diritti umani in tutto il mondo.
There is a growing need for a global stance against the use of technology for oppression. This post delves into the impact of Israeli surveillance technologies in Palestine and how localized instances of its use contribute to widespread acceptance an…
Avviso contenuto: Ecco perché non ci sono piaciuti i capitoli dedicati all'impatto delle tecnologie digitali (Violenza digitale) sulla dignità umana, della “Dignitas infinita circa la dignità umana”, ossia la dichiarazione del Dicastero per la Dottrina della Fede
Riportiamo alcune nostre considerazioni sui capitoli conclusivi, dedicati all’impatto delle tecnologie digitali (Violenza digitale) sulla dignità umana, della “Dignitas infinita circa la dignità umana”, ossia la dichiarazione del Dicastero per la Dottrina della Fede, presieduto dal Cardinale Víctor Manuel Fernández. Sebbene condividiamo le preoccupazioni verso una tecnologia digitale…
Ecco perché non ci sono piaciuti i capitoli dedicati all’impatto delle tecnologie digitali (Violenza digitale) sulla dignità umana, della “Dignitas infinita circa la dignità umana”, ossia la dichiarazione del Dicastero per la Dottrina della Fede
Ecco perché non ci sono piaciuti i capitoli dedicati all’impatto delle tecnologie digitali (Violenza digitale) sulla dignità umana, della “Dignitas infinita…
Il concorrente X di Meta, Threads, invita gli sviluppatori a registrarsi per l'accesso API e pubblica documenti
Dopo aver aperto la sua API per sviluppatori per selezionare aziende da testare a marzo , Threads, concorrente di Meta su Twitter/X, sta ora introducendo la documentazione per gli sviluppatori e un foglio di registrazione per le parti interessate prima del lancio pubblico dell'API, previsto per giugno
Ecco perché non ci sono piaciuti i capitoli dedicati all’impatto delle tecnologie digitali (Violenza digitale) sulla dignità umana, della “Dignitas infinita circa la dignità umana”, ossia la dichiarazione del Dicastero per la Dottrina della Fede
Ecco perché non ci sono piaciuti i capitoli dedicati all’impatto delle tecnologie digitali (Violenza digitale) sulla dignità umana, della “Dignitas infinita…
Avviso contenuto: The lead committees of the European Parliament, LIBE and ENVI, are to give their final nod to the regulation on the creation of a “European Health Data Space” (EHDS) tomorrow. According …
The lead committees of the European Parliament, LIBE and ENVI, are to give their final nod to the regulation on the creation of a “European Health Data Space” (EHDS) tomorrow. According to this regulation, information on all medical treatment, including vaccination status, medication and pregnancies, laboratory and discharge reports, is to be stored digitally for all patients – including privately insured patients who are currently not covered by the electronic patient file in Germany. These files will be accessible to a large number of organisations throughout Europe. As shadow rapporteur and co-negotiator of the regulation for the Committee on Home Affairs (LIBE), Pirate Party MEP Dr. Patrick Breyer, warns of a loss of control by patients over sensitive health data and a loss of medical confidentiality.
“Information about our physical and mental health is extremely sensitive. If we cannot rely on this information being treated confidentially by our doctors, we may no longer seek treatment and may even increase the risk of suicide. The EU is allowing the most sensitive patient files to be accumulated, networked and passed on without ensuring that patients have control and self-determination over their data. ‘Anything goes, nothing has to’ is not an approach that patients can trust. Without trust, a European Health Data Space cannot work. According to surveys, more than 80% of EU citizens want to decide for themselves about the sharing of their patient records. The majority of them want to be asked for consent. The EU deal is far from this. It betrays the interests and will of patients in order to sell their data to Big Tech and pharmaceutical giants. We Pirates strongly reject the disenfranchisement of patients that this regulation entails.
A Europe-wide obligation to use electronic patient records was prevented, among other things, thanks to my initiative. According to Article 8h and Recital 13a of the Regulation, the German and Austrian right to object to the establishment of an electronic patient file has been preserved. In the event of an objection, the mandatory information will only be stored by the treating doctor. I myself will object to this electronic patient file so as not to lose control over my health data. However, we know that very few patients who object to external access to their data actually go through the complicated objection procedure.
Anyone who does not object to the electronic patient file or its analysis as a whole will probably also inevitably allow cross-border access to it by foreign practitioners, researchers, and governments. The right to object specifically to cross-border data access planned by the German government is not provided for in the regulation in a legally secure manner. This is contrary to the interests and wishes of patients, only a minority of whom, according to opinion polls, want cross-border access to their patient records across Europe. Moreover, it does not come close to doing justice to the sensitivity of health data, which ranges from addictions, mental disorders, and abortions to sexually transmitted diseases and reproductive disorders.
Furthermore, the regulation is designed to maximise the exploitation of our personal health data and does not serve the interests of patients. Contrary to the European Parliament’s original position, for example, sensitive health data does not have to be stored in Europe, meaning that non-European storage in US cloud services, for example, is also permitted. The EU Parliament has also abandoned its call for independent certification of the security of European health data systems.
The EU regulation does not require Germany to protect health data any better than the German government has decided. In future, doctors treating patients throughout Europe will be able to view their entire patient file without their consent – unless they explicitly object. In future, health ministries and health authorities, universities, technology companies, and the pharmaceutical industry will also have access to anonymised and personally identifiable (only pseudonymised) patient files throughout Europe without the patient’s consent – unless the patient expressly objects. In Germany, there is no right to object to the disclosure of medical register data records and billing data records. Patients are only asked for their consent before their genetic data is accessed, but not for information on psychological and addiction therapies, abortions, sexual, and reproductive disorders. For us Pirates, patient control over their data and the protection of medical confidentiality take centre stage, so that access to treatment records by third parties is only acceptable after obtaining patient consent.“
Anja Hirschel, medical computer scientist and top candidate of the Pirate Party for the 2024 European elections, adds: “Centralised data storage awakens desires in a wide variety of directions. However, this does not only entail hacker attacks, but also so-called ‘secondary use’. This refers to access that is to be granted in full for research purposes. The patient data is then to be passed on to third parties. From a data protection perspective, even the centralised collection of data is problematic, and at least an opt-in procedure (active consent) is the right way to go. This would allow each individual a certain degree of decision-making autonomy over their personal data. However, if not even an opt-out procedure (active objection) is established, this ultimately means the abolition of the confidentiality of all medical information. And this despite the fact that doctors in Germany are rightly subject to professional confidentiality in accordance with Section 203 of the German Criminal Code (StGB), as are, among others, lawyers. This protection of our most private information and the right to confidential care and counselling are now at stake.“
The German government supports the EU plans. In contrast, the European Consumer Organisation BEUC and the data protection network EDRi have criticised them.
Avviso contenuto: Pirate Party MEP Patrick Breyer has asked the European Commission for an opinion on the decision by French computer game manufacturer Ubisoft to make the popular computer game “The Crew 1” …
Pirate Party MEP Patrick Breyer has asked the European Commission for an opinion on the decision by French computer game manufacturer Ubisoft to make the popular computer game “The Crew 1” unusable from April 2024. In Breyer’s opinion, this measure could violate EU law. Meanwhile an initiative centred around the Youtuber Ross Scott has formed to oppose the destruction of video games (stopkillinggames.com).
MEP Patrick Breyer explains:
“The shutdown of ‘The Crew 1′ by Ubisoft is an alarming example of how gamers’ interests are being ignored. It is unacceptable and probably also illegal for companies to first sell popular games at a profit and then kill them at short notice. Pirates demand a legal framework that prevents orphaned software from simply disappearing. The community should have the opportunity to take orphaned software over and develop it further. This policy also promotes sustainability, for example by allowing control routines for hardware to be maintained and updated, which increases the service life of the devices.
Software is more than just a product on the shelf. Computer games in particular are an integral part of our digital culture. At my request, the EU Commission must now clarify whether Ubisoft’s actions are in conflict with current EU consumer protection law and which limits exist for computer game manufacturers when killing previously sold games.”
Breyer’s written question to the EU Commission tabled on Friday in full:
“The French computer game manufacturer Ubisoft distributed the game The Crew 1 until December 2023. However, by shutting down its servers, it will no longer be playable from April 2024.
is this action in breach of EU law?
which limits does EU law generally place on computer game manufacturers when decommissioning previously sold computer games?
which authorities are responsible for enforcing the regulations?”
OpenAI, Google e Meta hanno ignorato le politiche aziendali, modificato le proprie regole e discusso di come aggirare la legge sul copyright per addestrare le loro IA
La corsa per guidare l’intelligenza artificiale è diventata una caccia disperata ai dati digitali necessari per far avanzare la tecnologia. Secondo un’analisi del New York Times, per ottenere tali dati, le aziende tecnologiche hanno violato tutto ciò che potevano violare
"Didattica al cubo": l'8 aprile 2024, h.17:00-19:00 divertimento e didattica con Minetest. Crossposting da @informapirata
Lunedì 8 aprile 2024, alle 17:00-19:00 @zughy terrà un incontro presso il Liceo Scientifico “Toniolo” ed in contemporanea in videoconferenza; il corso “Didattica al cubo” esploderà le interessanti potenzialità didattiche di #Minetest. Ingresso libero. Iscrizione al seguente link:
"Didattica al cubo": divertimento e didattica con Minetest
Lunedì 8 aprile 2024, alle 17:00-19:00 @zughy terrà un incontro presso il Liceo Scientifico “Toniolo” ed in contemporanea in videoconferenza; il corso “Didattica al cubo” esploderà le interessanti potenzialità didattiche di #Minetest. Ingresso libero. Iscrizione al seguente link:
Alzheimer chiama Europa. L'appello per riportare la demenza al centro dell’agenda politica dell’Europa
La demenza è la 3a causa di mortalità in Europa e la 7a a livello globale, con un costo sociale in Europa di 392 miliardi di euro nel 2019
Con 41 organizzazioni di persone con demenza e loro familiari in 36 Paesi, abbiamo individuato delle azioni concrete che la politica deve impegnarsi a realizzare: sono raccolte nel Manifesto di Helsinki
L’Unione europea e gli Stati Uniti condivideranno i risultati delle rispettive indagini di mercato sulle possibili distorsioni del mercato nell’industria dei semiconduttori, hanno affermato venerdì (aprile) funzionari dei due alleati in una conferenza stampa alla sesta riunione del Consiglio per...
I 14 anni di Collateral Murder: la vendetta dei colpevoli si è abbattuta su Julian Assange, costretto a una reclusione sproporzionata
Oggi ricorre il 14° anno dalla pubblicazione da parte di #WikiLeaks del vide #CollateralMurder di Julian Assange che mostrava l'uccisione di civili in Iraq.
Assange rischia una condanna a 175 anni se estradato negli Stati Uniti per le sue pubblicazioni nell'interesse pubblico #FreeAssangeNOW
https://www.raiplay.it/collezioni/julianassangejournalismontrial/ - Riccardo Iacona examines the judicial proceedings made against Julian Assange, the founder of Wikileaks.
più o meno come alcune persone cristiane usano la quaresima per "digiunare" da alcuni aspetti della vita che considerano poco sani Che siano i social, i dolci, o altro
Intelligenza artificiale, 6G, semiconduttori, materie prime, rispetto dei diritti fondamentali nella sfera online. Alla sesta riunione di alto livello del Ttc a Lovanio i due partner hanno fatto il punto del lavoro sui principali dossier digitali, mentre all'orizzonte si profila la minaccia Trump sulle relazioni tra Bruxelles e Washington
Un hacker vigilante ha messo fuori uso la rete Internet della Corea del Nord. Ora si sta togliendo la maschera
Come “P4x”, Alejandro Caceres da solo ha sconvolto Internet di un intero paese. Poi ha cercato di mostrare all’esercito americano come può – e dovrebbe – adottare i suoi metodi.
Capisco l'argomentazione, ma il contesto è troppo differente e diventa pericoloso pensarla così. Allora vale tutto, finché ognuno pensa che dall'altra parte ci sia un nemico.
Non è una difesa al governo della DPKR, la mia, ma per quanto si possa criticare il governo di uno stato non mi sembra ragionevole condonare condotte criminali a tappeto da parte di un civile di un paese estero.
Già sarebbe diverso se fosse un cittadino locale o se fosse stata un'azione mirata a singoli individui. Ma l'intera rete internet governativa? Siamo seri?
Andrebbe bene distruggere la rete idrica degli Emirati Arabi perché sono una monarchia (anche molto più spietata del DPKR di sicuro)? O far saltare le telecomunicazioni in tutta la Russia perché Putin è stato eletto con una farsa (ed è un leader terribile)?
Stai praticamente dicendo che chiunque dovrebbe sentirsi autorizzato a fare qualsiasi danno ad altri popoli sulla base del giudizio personale sul governo di quel popolo.
@Kir distinguere il governo dal popolo è un approccio sostanzialmente corretto, ma nel caso della Corea del Nord siamo in presenza di un governo che sfrutta tutti i cittadini per l'autoperpetuazione, basa la propria strategia sul cyberattacco indiscriminato verso le nostre istituzioni, i nostri ospedali, le nostre aziende e i nostri conti correnti.
L'attivismo hacker contro la Corea del Nord è, oltre che comprensibile, arrogantemente virtuoso e intrinsecamente etico
@Kir no, scusami ma non c'entra nulla. Non c'entra con la questione di Gaza (il problema della reazione israeliana è che è sproporzionata, distruttiva, cruenta e indiscriminata), né c'entra nulla con l'iniziativa del privato cittadino, che se non sbaglio, costituiva il fulcro della tua obiezione iniziale.
Non ho detto che la situazione è la stessa, ci mancherebbe, ho detto che il principio legittimante sottostante è lo stesso.
Se diciamo che quando riteniamo che un governo di un altro stato sia inadatto, siamo legittimati a compiere atti di violenza diretta o indiretta contro il suo popolo, poi questo è quello che succede. A me sembra gravissimo e arrogante. La classica "esportazione della democrazia" all'americana che è un neocolonialismo schifoso ed ipocrita (non mi è sfuggito il tuo termine "stato canaglia", che richiama bene il fondamento ideologico sottostante).
Procura europea e Guardia di Finanza scoprono una maxi-frode sui fondi PNRR
Nel contesto di un’indagine internazionale su larga scala condotta dalla Procura europea (EPPO) a Venezia (Italia) e dalla Guardia di finanza italiana è stato scoperto un sistema di frode internazionale che ha portato a sequestri preventivi di ingente valore
Avviso contenuto: La rete EDRi sollecita da tempo i legislatori dell’Unione Europea (UE) a garantire che gli sforzi per combattere l’OCSEA (sfruttamento e abuso sessuale di minori online) siano legali, efficaci e tecnicamente fattibili. L’obiettivo di proteggere i bambini
Riportiamo la traduzione del post pubblicato oggi sul sito di EDRi Avviso sui contenuti: contiene riferimenti all’abuso e allo sfruttamento sessuale dei minori La rete EDRi sollecita da tempo i legislatori dell’Unione Europea (UE) a garantire che gli sforzi per combattere l’OCSEA (sfruttamento e abuso sessuale di minori online) siano legali, efficaci e tecnicamente fattibili.
La rete EDRi sollecita da tempo i legislatori dell’Unione Europea (UE) a garantire che gli sforzi per combattere l’OCSEA (sfruttamento e abuso sessuale di minori online) siano legali, efficaci e tecnicamente fattibili. L’obiettivo di proteggere i bambini online è vitale. Ciò può essere fatto solo se le misure proposte funzionano e sono compatibili con i […]
La rete EDRi sollecita da tempo i legislatori dell’Unione Europea (UE) a garantire che gli sforzi per combattere l’OCSEA (sfruttamento e abuso sessuale di…
La rete EDRi sollecita da tempo i legislatori dell’Unione Europea (UE) a garantire che gli sforzi per combattere l’OCSEA (sfruttamento e abuso sessuale di minori online) siano legali, efficaci e tecnicamente fattibili. L’obiettivo di proteggere i bambini online è vitale. Ciò può essere fatto solo se le misure proposte funzionano e sono compatibili con i […]
La rete EDRi sollecita da tempo i legislatori dell’Unione Europea (UE) a garantire che gli sforzi per combattere l’OCSEA (sfruttamento e abuso sessuale di…
Washington e Bruxelles sembrano il meme di SpiderMan... Ecco la newsletter DigitalBridge di Mark Scott
– 3 anni dopo Bruxelles e Washingtonsono sempre più simili
— Il nuovo regime di concorrenza europeo è il “fantasma del futuro del Natale” per la causa antitrust del Dipartimento di Giustizia degli USA contro Apple
— Non tutti i tentativi di tenere a freno le forme più avanzate di intelligenza artificiale dovrebbero essere giudicati allo stesso modo
POLITICO's weekly transatlantic tech newsletter uncovers the digital relationship between critical power-centers through exclusive insights and breaking news for global technology elites and political influencers.
Avviso contenuto: IT’S THURSDAY, AND THAT MEANS ANOTHER DIGITAL BRIDGE. I’m Mark Scott, POLITICO’s chief technology correspondent, and as the great and the good of the transatlantic digital policy world gather on the outskirts of Brussels, you find me filing this dispatch
POLITICO’s weekly transatlantic tech newsletter uncovers the digital relationship between critical power-centers through exclusive insights and breaking news for global technology elites and political influencers.
IT’S THURSDAY, AND THAT MEANS ANOTHER DIGITAL BRIDGE. I’m Mark Scott, POLITICO’s chief technology correspondent, and as the great and the good of the transatlantic digital policy world gather on the outskirts of Brussels, you find me filing this dispatch from Seattle. Go figure.
Enough of the bellyaching. Let’s get to it:
— Three years into the EU-U.S. revamp, Brussels is now more like Washington, and Washington is quickly turning into Brussels.
— Europe’s new competition regime is the “ghost of Christmas future” for the U.S. Department of Justice’s antitrust lawsuit against Apple.
— Not everyone’s attempts to rein in the most advanced forms of artificial intelligence should be judged equally.
WHEN DIGITAL POLICYMAKING ENTERS THE SPIDER-RVERSE
THERE’S A POPULAR MEME OF TWO SPIDER-MEN pointing at each other often used when people want to show how things are alike — even identical. That’s the feeling I get looking at what will be announced at the latest (and possibly last?) EU-U.S. Trade and Technology Council (TTC), a two-day summit that starts Thursday in Leuven, a city just outside Brussels. Officials including U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken and European Commission digital chief Margrethe Vestager will meet to reinforce how closely the United States and European Union now view digital policymaking. What’s clear is that over the past three years, Washington and Brussels have rubbed off on each other, sometimes in surprising ways.
Before we get into that — and what that means going forward — let’s do a quick run-through of what will be announced Friday. My colleagues did a pretty good job in last week’s newsletter. But to recap, expected announcements include: greater collaboration on artificial intelligence between the U.S. AI Safety Institute and Commission’s AI Office; closer ties on so-called 6G next-generation telecommunications standards (in part, to push back against China); a three-year continuation of information-sharing on semiconductor supply chains and government subsidies; an agreement to further cooperate against Russian- and Chinese-backed influence operations, with a name check for the Western Balkans; a commitment to joint fund telecom and cybersecurity projects in the Global South, including a new deal in Tunisia; and demands that online platforms protect so-called human rights defenders and give outsiders greater access to social media data.
Phew. However, if you take a step back from this week’s glad-handing, it’s mostly a piecemeal approach to everything from quantum computing and critical emerging technologies to social media and artificial intelligence oversight. In short: It sounds like a lot. But if you think of the gamut of topics to be discussed — over a lavish dinner, public fireside chat and behind-the-scenes meetings — the summit’s outcomes aren’t that spectacular. I would argue that’s a good thing. If you’re going to reforge a once-faulty transatlantic relationship, it’s better to get lost in the wonkery of digital policymaking. Don’t get caught up in “moon shot” announcements that can lead to unrealistic expectations of an EU-U.S. relationship that still has its difficulties.
And that brings me back to the “Spidey meme.” When the TTC was first proposed, in the latter months of Donald Trump’s administration, it would have been unrealistic to suggest Brussels might willingly bend to Washington’s pressure on many issues now openly discussed in these twice-annual summits. Yet, if you consider the U.S.’s overtly anti-China stance, it’s fair to say the EU is more in that camp than at any time before. You can see it in the bloc’s recent economic security package that wouldn’t be out of place coming from the White House. You can see it in the EU’s Chips Act, a multibillion-euro plan to bring some microchip production back to Europe. You can see it in the telecom infrastructure spending in developing economies and the increasingly hawkish position on 6G standards. Not all those plans have come via the TTC. But it’s clear regular meetings with their American counterparts have rubbed off on European officials.
This isn’t a one-way street. Congress may be stuck in second gear, but the spate of digital policy announcements — from the White House and, I would argue, the U.S. Department of Justice (in its antitrust cases) and the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (on its similar competition lawsuits and privacy commitments) — from that side of the Atlantic feel overtly European. My recent visit to Washington cemented this view. Gone are the days when U.S. officials would repeat industry talking points about no need for regulation and oversight. Sure, you get that in some agencies. But, overall, the discussion has shifted to what those rules should look like. And with that has come an EU-centric view of transparency, accountability and responsibility that seeps out of Washington’s renewed vision of digital policymaking. It’s hard not to see Brussels’ hand in some of that.
Before I get irate emails, not all of this is down to Washington embracing its “inner Brussels,” or vice versa. The European Commission, on its own, has become more hostile to China and now views digital policymaking through more of a national security lens. After years of missing the boat on tech regulation, the White House is belatedly getting into the game. Regular meetings — often between mid-ranking officials, many of whom have featured in “Wonk of the Week” — have done what the TTC was supposed to do: rekindle personal ties, create an opportunity to share ideas, and compete with a like-minded ally to shape good policy.
Will that continue after this year’s election cycle? There’s goodwill, on both sides, for it to do so, but everyone admits — candidly — that November’s election in the U.S. is such a game-changer that nothing is certain. As someone who, personally, encapsulates the transatlantic relationship, I’m optimistic. Not that the TTC will continue (my bet is that it won’t, at least not in its current form). But the policy osmosis these summits have instilled will stick around long after you stop reading about them in this newsletter. Like it or not, Brussels is more aligned with Washington’s national security-focused stance on digital. And, conversely, Washington is more willing to embrace Brussels-style rulemaking than ever before. If that’s the TTC’s legacy, so be it.
THE MULTIPLE FACES OF ANTITRUST ENFORCEMENT
THIS JOB SOMETIMES LETS ME TIME TRAVEL. One day, I’m reading the U.S. Department of Justice-led lawsuit against Apple and its alleged anticompetitive behavior. That includes everything from undermining app developers and harming rival messaging services to crowding out cloud-based games. The next, I’m catching up with EU officials on their investigations into how Meta, Alphabet and Apple may have infringed the bloc’s new antitrust rules. Those probes focus equally — at least when it comes to Alphabet and Apple — on the tech giants potentially undermining app developers; limiting choice for consumers looking to swap to different services; and, for the search giant, potentially stacking the deck in favor of its own products. All of these companies deny any wrongdoing.
So why the time travel reference? For those of us with long memories of digital antitrust cases, what the Department of Justice announced sounds awfully similar to what the European Commission has doing over the last decade. By that, I mean focusing on how a small number of so-called gatekeeper companies have throttled innovation, hampered rivals and cut out consumer choice via a complex web of business decisions that favor their services over those of rivals. You can see it in Brussels’ three–partseries of competition decisions against Google. While the search giant’s issues are somewhat different compared with those now facing Apple, the basic premise of the complaint is the same: A dominant smartphone software developer tilted the scales unfairly in its favor. For balance: Google is still appealing those decisions.
Those at the Department of Justice might reject claims that they’re reliving what the Commission already did. And, to be fair, the Apple case — which encompasses everything from smartwatches to messaging apps to financial services payments — is more expansive than anything that Brussels has so far thrown at the companies. But it does really feel like the U.S. is relitigating what the EU has already decided: that you can’t rely on the word of a small number of digital giants to uphold fair competition rules, especially when it involves a complex interplay of hardware, software and third-party developers in often proprietary commercial agreements. If the basic premise is that these companies may abuse their fairly acquired dominant position, then scolding them after the fact just isn’t going to cut it.
Hence why the Commission’s investigations — the first ones opened under the bloc’s Digital Markets Act — are a clear sign to those in the U.S. of what lies ahead. As part of the EU’s new antitrust regime, which will progressively come into force over the next two years, companies designated gatekeepers need to show how they allow others to compete fairly for potential customers — and, more importantly, revenue. That includes providing opt-outs for those seeking alternatives to, say, Apple’s App Store or Google Search. This is based on the belief — ever present in the Department of Justice’s lawsuit — that these companies are likely to lock in users to maximize profit and build barriers for rivals wherever they can.
As part of the new antitrust obligations, companies including Meta, ByteDance and Amazon have been forced to do things that would seem alien to people living outside the EU. Apple, for instance, made a series of changes to its businesses, including opening up its iOS software to rival app stores, allowing people to choose an alternative to its browser and reducing fees for third-party developers. Not everyone — most obviously Apple — is happy about these changes. But it’s a tacit recognition that the status quo — outlined, again, in the Department of Justice’s lawsuit — is not going to fly. For its part, the iPhone maker says these changes will harm users through increased privacy and security risks. Its opponents say Apple hasn’t gone far enough to open its digital walled garden to competition. You can never win.
The EU’s investigations, which will likely take most of a year and may lead to nothing, are the first test to determine whether the gatekeepers’ changes meet the bloc’s new standards. Those outside of Europe, especially in the U.S., may be wondering why EU consumers get more of a choice while they’re stuck with limited options and, for competitors, high fees. It’s a fair argument — one that is also playing out as Brussels enacts its separate online content-moderation rules, known as the Digital Services Act, which gives the bloc greater oversight over platforms in an all-important election year.
It’s true the EU and the U.S. legal systems are sufficiently different such that it’s unrealistic to port Europe’s new competition regime directly across the Atlantic. But at a time when U.S. authorities are aggressively pursuing competition cases against Big Tech (some, ahem, unsuccessfully), it’s a reminder there’s a lot to learn from those who have already trodden that path. Europe’s Digital Markets Act is the “ghost of Christmas future” for the U.S. when it comes to potentially stopping gatekeeping companies from abusing their positions, even before such harm takes place. Litigating the past — which, arguably, is what the Department of Justice is now doing, similar to what the Commission did with its Google’s cases — solves yesterday’s problems, today. Better to think about where future harm may come from and do what you can (albeit, clunkily) before that abuse ever occurs.
BY THE NUMBERS
WHAT ARE ALL THESE AI SAFETY INSTITUTES FOR?
JAPAN HAS ONE. SO DOES THE UNITED KINGDOM. The U.S.’s version is slowly coming together. The EU’s equivalent has a different name, but is about a month old. What am I talking about? The explosion of so-called AI Safety Institutes, quasi-government agencies in charge of mitigating some of the potential downsides of the most advanced forms of artificial intelligence.
This week, the U.S. signed separate collaboration agreementswith both the U.K. and the EU (the Washington-Brussels deal will be announced Friday) to coordinate how these institutes conduct their work. Japan hopes to pen similar relationships in the near future. The goal, according to those involved, is to maximize the impact of such work by sharing best practices with like-minded countries.
That all sounds great. But it’s also true that each country’s regulatory approach to AI governance is markedly different. Some, like the U.K., don’t have any AI legislation on the books. How people define “safety” also significantly differs depending on where you look. I’m not saying these international agreements aren’t worthwhile; it’s just easier to announce them than actually put them into practice.
WONK OF THE WEEK
GIVEN THAT THE BELGIANS WILL NOMINALLY host this week’s EU-U.S. Trade and Technology Council summit under their presidency of the Council of the European Union, we’re going for a two-parter this week.
Playing host-with-the-most will be Belgian Prime Minister Alexander De Croo, a Flemish politician who worked at the Boston Consulting Group before turning his hand to politics 15 years ago — he’s served in multiple governments before taking the top job in 2020.
Alongside De Croo will be Hadja Lahbib, Belgium’s minister of foreign affairs, European affairs and foreign trade. Lahbib is a former journalist with expertise in the Middle East and Afghanistan, who took on her ministerial role in the summer of 2022.
THEY SAID WHAT, NOW?
China’s “Ministry of State Security and its state security departments focused on surreptitiously identifying and influencing the foreign policy of other countries, including the United States,” according to a U.S. indictment against a Chinese-government linked company and seven Chinese individuals for alleged efforts to conduct malicious cyber operations against critical networks in the U.S., the U.K. and other nations.
WHAT I’M READING
— A China-backed influence campaign, mostly on Facebook, has continued to endure despite Meta’s efforts to rid its platform of the inauthentic behavior, based on analysis from the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.
— Sebastian Bay, a Swedish disinformation expert, used Google’s generative AI tools to analyze the company’s submissions detailing how it’s implementing the European Commission’s code of practice on disinformation. It did not do well.
— Katie Harbath, a former senior Meta executive, summarizes takeaways from the Aspen Institute’s recent conference on AI, disinformation and elections. It’s worth a read.
— OpenAI is testing new versions of AI-generated audio, in multiple languages, that will likely have both positive and negative consequences. Take a look at the company’s findings here.
— The Biden administration published a detailed memofrom its Office of Management and Budget explaining how the White House’s executive order on artificial intelligence will be implemented. Janet Haven, executive director of Data & Society, gives her view, while Pam Dixon, executive director of World Privacy Forum, has a more data protection-focused take.
— The growing trend toward so-called data localization worldwide will almost certainly harm human rights and limit the use of technology and the internet for good, according to a four-way discussion with civil society groups facilitated by Freedom House.
Degli studi dimostrano che le app di default raccolgono dati anche quando alcune funzioni dovrebbero essere disabilitate ed è molto difficile far si che questo effettivamente non accada
L’UE e gli Stati Uniti cercano di attirare i paesi in via di sviluppo in una partnership sulle materie prime critiche
L’UE e gli Stati Uniti stanno invitando i paesi in via di sviluppo a stringere una partnership che mira ad allineare le misure sulla fornitura di materie prime essenziali, ha affermato mercoledì (3 aprile) un funzionario della Commissione.
The fact that you can follow the president of the United States (@potus) from your Mastodon account instead of being forced to have an X or Threads account for it is a huge W in my book. Of course our team is fully available to help if they'd want to set up Mastodon on whitehouse.gov. I believe governments should not rely on 3rd party platforms to connect with their constituents.
@stux Honestly though I don't feel like it's much of a choice.
If I understand correctly, to interact with that account in any way is to allow Threads access to any and all data they can extract from me here, which... I'm here because I don't want to play that game any more.
It's a step in the right direction but I sure don't count it as a W.
Yeah let's make this US-centric too *sighs*. And now with an extra dose of transphobes and nazis Threads refuses to moderate, and that would imply an automatic defederation if it was literally any other instance.
@kkeller Already did the first, and gonna try to get the second one ready by this weekend (although I already set myself several deadlines and failed them :/) still leaving the biggest and more or less "official" instance federating with the place that welcomes fascists and transphobes is a very bad thing for the entire fedi, a double standard and a sign that their admins don't really care for the safety of their users.
@cygnathreadbare @kkeller If you did defederare why are you still commenting on too that talks about (@potus )? Honest question why the evangelization? If you are convinced and doing actions that reflect that why blasting around?
@Twitter_expat @kkeller @potus@mastodon.world am I not allowed to voice my concerns to the lead developer and admin of the biggest instance, where some of my mutuals are, and who will be unsafe because of this decision?
@cygnathreadbare @kkeller @potus The majority of the people here on the #fediverse ran away from one person making all the decisions. I don’t know if you are aware of that. Not the admin of the biggest instance, nor you nor anyone “with concerns”. You are free to voice whatever you want as you are doing but decisions like that won’t come from you nor any single person.
@Twitter_expat @kkeller @potus@mastodon.world I'm just asking for mastodon.social to comply with its own server rules the same way it did in other cases with the same unmoderated content. They are free to change them, of course, just admit that some transphobia and fascism is acceptable, and let the rest of the fediverse decide what to do with that.
...except he is not on the fediverse. He's on threads.net, which is a walled garden you can't interact with, and the content the president's PR flacks will post there is hardly unique. I mean, I could set up a script that reposts the whitehouse.gov RSS feed to mastodon with a #potus tag. Would that mean the president is "on" mastodon?
@artemesia @Twitter_expat a part that breaks your moderation standards on a systemic basis, has supported genocide, transphobia, systemic racism, and fascism. And fails to moderate any of that effectively. You're welcoming libs of tiktok into the fediverse too eugen, are you going to make a post about that too?
ich weiß threads ist für viele hier das personifizierte böse aber ich fands schon ziemlich cool dass ich jetzt dem account des amerikanischen präsidenten auf mastodon folgen kann nice
The chatter and engagement that @potus is bringing to the fediverse is amazing and good for everyone, even the ones who oppose it. Blocking instead of laying out their claims is absurd.
Tell that the german government or european businesses getting themselves stuck in foreign US based cloud systems and softwares.......Instead of supporting Mastodon, Nextcloud, Tuta(nota) and other german, european or maybe not european but privacy friendly alternatives....
@simonharper @ivory Threads users have to opt-in to federation on their side, but anyone who has opted-in, yes, it's just like following any Mastodon user.
If the first part of your statement actually described a huge win, there wouldn't be any need for the White House to ever follow up on the second part.
This level of submissiveness to Threads is starting to look extremely pathetic.
Unless Threads server is blocked on the instance you're on. I get people not wanting to federate with Threads server-wide but users should be able to follow whoever they want on their personal timeline especially gov accounts...
@kkeller That's easier said than done especially in a situation like Threads.
a) This can lead to more centralization if too many people have to migrate to a few instances willing to give them the ability to follow people on Threads.
b) Also, there's other advantages to use an instance close to my interest e.g Open Source and contribute to keep this smaller instances alive to avoid a)
So I don't think migrating is a great long term solution to the problem of who someone can follow.
That depends on your server. Lots have blocked Federation with threads but it isn't abundantly clear which ones have. It really is kinda messy right now.
No, I can’t follow that account. I have to log in and create an account, says Threads. Eh… No thank you.
I am not sure I ever planned on following Biden anyway - BUT his team might need to know that you can help them. Otherwise they might just stay on Threads if it seems easier.
If the accounts that can see Bidens posts are limited to Treads, that means he could just have stayed on IG lol
@wjmaggos Thank you. But yes I do need a Threads account according to Threads, even though my admin hasn’t de-federated Threads. (And no, I am not going to get a Threads account). Thanks anyway 😀
Governments as well as all medium to large public & private institutions IMHO. Why any CEO/board would cede control of their entire online presence to opaque for-profit corporations (especially those with horrendous track records and/or uncertain futures) is beyond me.
@sharoz Click on the handle in my post. If it doesn't open, then your service provider (scicomm.xyz) is blocking Threads. You can complain to the operator, who can be found on the about page; or move to a Mastodon server that has a different policy (when you move accounts on Mastodon, you keep your followers).
Thanks, but I already moved servers once. I lost my post history and a bunch of followers from servers that require their users to manually approve new followers. Not exactly consequence free 🙁
@sharoz From looking at your server's about page I've found that the operator is @quokka and that the list of blocked servers which would normally provide transparency on such decisions has not been made public.
I saw a pretty strong argument that given the current interpretations of the American 1st amendment, it would mean that if the US government hosted a mastodon server it would be illegal for the government to moderate who could post comments to it.
Most other western democratic freedom of speech laws aren't nearly as absolute and so their governments can block incitements to violence or obvious hate speech.
If anyone has family/friends who use threads and are unlikely to switch over to mastodon, direct them to turn on fediverse sharing, it's not on by default.
Why is it a win to be able to follow potus on mastodon please? If they have anything important to say, let them hold a press conference, as has been done forever. Why is it important to follow every one of their thoughts they decide to vomit into the world.
@mjgardner I'm quite aware that I can switch servers, but this one has been good, I’ve supported them, and hope they'll reconsider this particular position.
@mjgardner I don't really understand why…maybe you can't "block" just the stream and allow users to follow individuals (which is all I would want to do).
@dnanian As I understand it, those advocating a complete #Threads domain block take issue with the possibility that parent company #Meta may misuse *incoming* #fediverse content and metadata, not their *outgoing* traffic.
This is ironic because, apart from anonymized "likes,” Threads users who have opted in can’t receive federated messages yet.
@mjgardner @dnanian Your understanding is incorrect. Many of those who want to see Threads blocked at system level are concerned with Threads' moderation policies and the hateful and dangerous rhetoric they continue to allow.
To pick one example, Chaya Raichik (Libs of Tiktok) is on Threads.
Libs of TikTok, run by Chaya Raichik, has gained immense popularity on X. As her follower-count has risen, bomb threats targeting her subjects followed.
@mathew Cool, so rather than managing your own moderation so that sort of thing never darkens your feed, you’re agitating for everyone on the #fediverse to live under an indiscriminate ban-hammer.
And before you suggest folks like @dnanian move to another server with moderation they like, realize that you could do the same.
@alienghic @atomicpoet Then couldn’t the US Government go on something like a non-profit’s server? That way the non-profit could do the moderation and not be affiliated with the US Government?
Seconded! Governments should run their own web servers, and government agencies and officials should not have accounts or keep data on any private ones.
Yes, that's what I thought last night, that would be SUCH a win, terrific. It would be nice to have an official server for the Whitehouse, for instance, where all the government could have an account. Lovely, wonderful, all for it ❤
Why not mastodon.gov? I hope your team will work towards a broader solution that includes all branches of government as opposed to a narrow “White House” only focus.
Communicating directly with the people is important. And I hope this is just the beginning.
@atomicpoet exactly. I think the future for both governments and organizations is running an instance, similar to running a website. It’s already started to happen in the EU. These will soon be followable in Threads as well as any other activitypub app. We need products and services for making this more manageable. I.e. we need something like Wordpress or Squarespace for the #activitypub so orgs can readily build and manage instances on the social web.
whitehouse.gov would be a great idea, but you could go even further and federate down to the local level. It obviously varies from country to country, but in the U.S. we have well established high quality distributed library infrastructure (stuff and people). Why not resource them to provide ActivityPub services for their communities?
@atomicpoet @alienghic Um, do you have to allow replies to your Mastodon posts? I'm asking, because if you don't allow ANY replies to your posts, then you can't be guilty of viewpoint (or any other) discrimination. If no one is allowed to reply, then you haven't violated anyone's 1st amendment rights because they can still post whatever they'd like on their OWN account. In this way, POTUS could at least have the outlet, if not the interaction, through Mastodon.
"We believe there is an opportunity to help verify the online identities of American officials. Hosting a Mastodon server on .gov domains is one possibility.
That is a great point and I believe you are correct from how I understand it as well.
I have followed POTUS in support but maybe I should unfollow. For the record, I am for #FediPact and against Threads being on here for reasons like you cite, and also because they're a proven poor moderator of hate groups and hate speech, and because they will undoubtedly Embrace, Extend, Extinguish, as I've seen happen on the internet over and over again. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace%2C_extend%2C_and_extinguish
@atomicpoet @corbden biggest problem is, if I understand the fediverse correctly, if I follow potus at the account’s current location, that gives threads the server entity access to, at minimum, my account feed and that’s a Big No
I‘ll wait for a social.gov instance that is native instead of promoting a one-way street that leads to Meta/Facebook. And I am happy that your software allows me to block threads.net. Please don’t change that 😀
@Nuncio If you click on the handle and it opens a web page instead of opening in your app, it means your service provider is blocking threads.net and preventing you from following the profile from your Mastodon account. You can complain to your operator, which you can find on your about page.
ironically, it's American law (namely the First Amendment) which disallows whitehouse.gov (for example) from running a mastodon (or other #fediverse) instance. They would probably be, by law, disallowed from moderating bad posts/accounts.
Other countries don't have this legal limitation, which is why so many other governments have their own #fedi instances.
But yeah, not federating with threads, hell no. It speaks volumes about their influence on US politics now, too.
Honestly, I don't think any institutions should run their accounts on somebody else's instances.
@potus@us.gov along with all of Congress and other federal government reps on it that doesn't then have to share any of Facebook's deservedly bad reputation.
Same for states or companies, they should run their own instances for complete ownership of their content and distribution.
The people who cite “rampant nazis and transphobes” as a resin for wanting ever instance of the #fediverse to defederate from #threads are the same people who piled on and bullied me when I pushed back from a single person making decision of what I can or cannot see. Specially if I want to follow @potus from my mastodon account. So yes this high horses morally exceptional keyboard warriors have the same flaws as ever and any human.
Mastodon accounts can only follow potus if their instance admin lets them… So far @admin won’t. I’d really like a new discussion / poll now that there are more federated Threads account available. Contemplating switching instance now. (With all its downsides.)
Bad news - he is *on* Threads and the Mastodon account is using the controversial Threads - Mastodon bridge. If your domain blocks Threads it doesn't work.
@AlgoCompSynth No bridge required, Threads is interoperable with Mastodon. It's a direct connection, same as between mastodon.social and universeodon.com you're on. But if your operator blocks Threads, it won't work.
Given the recent court rulings that elected officials in the United States can't block constituents on social media if they're posting in an official capacity, I'm not sure it would be feasible for the US government to run a fediverse instance. They might be required to leave it essentially unmoderated except for content that is outright illegal.
We can do that on bird.makeup - better if they come into the Fediverse instead of the Fediverse relying on those sites that many have either left, or want nothing to do with.
Did you heard about fedipact ? (It's a rhetorical question)
"i am an instance admin/mod on the fediverse. by signing this pact, i hereby agree to block any instances owned by meta should they pop up on the fediverse. project92 is a real and serious threat to the health and longevity of fedi and must be fought back against at every possible opportunity"
It's worth noting that if the next POTUS was Mango Mussolini, how much better the Fediverse is equipped for booting him into the darkest corners of the Social Web.
Yeah you love standing in front of fascists don't you?
Never met a genocider you didn't like did you?
When this experiment has faded because of your thirsty need to be at the big table, let's just hope there is something better rather than you just being The next in a long line of sellouts
That you can report transphobic, homophobic & other bigotry from threads on the fedi & threads will do nothing about it far outweighs the win the ability to follow POTUS gives us
Yes! Please @potus ask your IT people about setting up your own Fediverse instance so you aren’t beholden to anyone! @Gargron can help them make it happen.
I must be doing something wrong. I don't see a way to follow the account. I tried searching for https://www.threads.net/@potus but the account isn't found.
46th President of the United States, husband to @flotus, proud dad and pop. Finishing the job for all Americans.
Text me: (302) 404-0880. 2.7M Followers.
For those that are unaware; The EU runs a Mastodon for information sharing, since the fediverse really does make a lot of of sense for governments and similarly sized/shaped organizations - https://social.network.europa.eu/ They even have a peertube for video communications as well - https://tube.network.europa.eu/
EU Voice is the official ActivityPub platform of the EU institutions. With EU Video, it is part of an alternative social media pilot proposed and provided by the European Data Protection Supervisor.
Julian Assange: “Questa generazione è l’ultima generazione libera" - Articolo e video del 21/9/2018
Il fondatore di #Wikileaks ha affermato che a anno dalla nascita, i bambini sono già noti alle "principali potenze mondiali" perché "genitori idioti" pubblicano i loro nomi e le loro foto su #Facebook. Assange prevede anche una futura cyberwar globale poiché Internet non ha distanze né confini e gli hacker possono attaccare chiunque in qualsiasi parte del pianeta
The Wikileaks founder said that within a year of being born, children are now known to 'all major world powers' because their 'idiotic parents' post their names and pictures on Facebook.
Pochi mesi dopo quel 2018 Assange veniva prelevato dall'ambasciata Ecuadoriana per finire nella prigione di massima sicurezza di Belmarsh. E' ancora lì in attesa di essere estradato negli Stati Uniti per aver fatto il lavoro che la maggior parte dei giornalisti si rifiuta di fare: esporre i crimini dei potenti. @pirati
Il 20 marzo, la GSMA – l’organizzazione che rappresenta gli interessi degli operatori di rete mobile di tutto il mondo – ha pubblicato il suo ultimo manifesto, in cui definisce le riforme necessarie per rendere l’ecosistema di connettività europeo adatto...
Avviso contenuto: Europol has published its Internet Organised Crime Assessment (IOCTA) (PDF). The report assesses the cybercrime landscape and describes how threads have changed over the last two years.
Patrick Breyer …
https://www.europol.europa.eu/cms/sites/default/fi
Europol has published its Internet Organised Crime Assessment (IOCTA) (PDF). The report assesses the cybercrime landscape and describes how threads have changed over the last two years.
Patrick Breyer MEP (German Pirate Party / Greens/EFA) and digital freedom fighter, comments:
“Europol’s support for indiscriminate data retention does not reflect the facts. The agency’s report identifies real threats that can’t be addressed with data retention or any other means of blanket mass surveillance of all citizen’s communication data. It is time for Europol and the European Union in general to refocus on targeted investigations and strenghening civil society.”
Europol’s role in the “Going Dark” program (#EUGoingDark)
In the report the European Union’s law enforcement agency focuses on cybercrime-as-a-service, underground communities, criminal markets for stolen credentials and victim data as well as on fraud strategies.
As member of the High-Level Expert Group on access to data for effective law enforcement which is also know as the “Going Dark” program Europol is tasked to “contribute to integrating a law enforcement perspective, including privacy and data protection requirements, in all relevant EU policies and actions (‘security by design’)” and to “explore how security by design could be a standard requirement in the development of new technologies.” Most pressing “challenges” identified are: Encryption (access, en clair, to stored content and digital communication data), data retention of localisation data and roaming data, as well as anonymisation, including VPN and Darknets. (Council document 8281/23 https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-8281-2023-INIT/en/pdfPDF)
Europol is a strong proponent of reintroducing provisions on the indiscriminate retention of citizen’s communications metadata such as IP addresses. In 2018 the agency was unsuccessful with a “Data Retention Matrix” – a proposal to introduce data retention in the European Union. (WK 3005/2018 INIT PDF)
Organised criminals can circumvent data retention – most law-abiding citizens cannot
According to the Internet Organised Crime Assessment Europol observes “a high level of specialisation inside criminal networks” and the agency faces the development that “[o]ffenders (…) mask their actions and identities as their knowledge of countermeasures increases.”
Patrick Breyer MEP comments:
“Europol’s report confirms the fact that blanket data retention is unsuitable for fighting organised crime because it can easily be circumvented, for example by using anonymisation services. What is needed instead of bulk storage of citizen’s communications meta data are fast, well equipped and targeted investigations.”
The role of Internet Service Providers
In the report, Europol presents Internet Service Providers as service providers for crimes: “Many Internet Service Providers (ISPs) frequently used by criminals do not engage in extensive customer monitoring practices such as Know-Your-Customer (KYC) procedures and storing of customer and metadata (e.g. IP address)”
Patrick Breyer MEP comments:
“Europol places Internet Service Providers under general suspicion and seems to expect them to violate privacy legislation. We have a right to use the Internet anonymously! Targeting ISP’s privacy policies is like generally blaming landlords for domestic violence. The task and duty of Internet Service Providers in democracies is to enable citizens to communicate securely and confidentially.”
Child grooming
The report finds that “[c]hild sexual exploitation offenders make extensive use of social media to engage with their victims, interacting with them often behind a false identity. (…) Child sexual exploitation offenders groom victims in order to obtain sensitive information that can be then exploited for extortion purposes.”
Patrick Breyer MEP comments:
“In fact Europol’s report rightly underlines the need for better education and training of (potential) victims, especially children and teenagers. Instead of data retention and other means of mass surveillance, we need more competent and better equipped social workers, training young people on perpetrator strategies and how to defeat them, anonymous online counselling, awareness programs, privacy-friendly design of social media platforms and other measures that actually address the problem.”
Prevent data theft
Addressing the economics of cybercrime Europol finds that “the central commodity of this illicit economy is stolen data”.
Patrick Breyer MEP comments:
“Europol’s report underlines the importance of privacy, anonymity and encryption to protect citizens from identity theft and other crimes. Bulk retention of personal data provokes hacks and leaks. Only data that is not being stored is secure data.”
Avviso contenuto: In Tigray, stato regionale del’ Etiopia settentrionale, ai confini con l’Eritrea, tra il novembre 2020 e il novembre 2022 si è combattuto una guerra genocida in cui le stime parlano di 800.000 persone di origini tigrine uccise, 120.000 donne di ogni età e
In Tigray, stato regionale del’ Etiopia settentrionale, ai confini con l’Eritrea, tra il novembre 2020 e il novembre 2022 si è combattuto una guerra genocida in cui le stime parlano di 800.000 persone di origini tigrine uccise, 120.000 donne di ogni età e ceto sociale stuprate come arma di guerra, distruzione e saccheggi. Nel novembre 2022 viene firmato l’accordo di cessazione ostilità a Pretoria tra governo etiope e membri del TPLF – Tigray People’s Liberation Front.
Un video scioccante (segue traduzione testuale in italiano) proveniente dal distretto #Irob violentemente occupato, Zona Orientale del Tigray , conferma solo ciò che già sappiamo: il regime eritreo sta imponendo una falsa identità eritrea agli residenti della minoranza etnica di Irob con la negazione degli aiuti e dei servizi essenziali e minacciando costrizione al servizio militare nazionale obbligatorio in Eritrea (noto come programma di schiavitù a tempo indeterminato) poiché territori annessi con la forza all’Eritrea. Il video è stato girato in una località chiamata Alakalo, presso Masi-Dage (scuola media) ad Adgadi-Are/Edalgeda (sottodistretto settentrionale di Irob).
“Come eritrei, anche voi dovete sostenere la lotta degli eritrei e del governo eritreo. Siamo tutti eritrei; non c’è distinzione tra te e noi.
Tutti gli eritrei devono sapere che il governo eritreo è stato costretto ad affrontare la lotta e la sofferenza che sta affrontando; non aveva alcun desiderio di prendervi parte.
Weyane (TPLF – Tigray People’s Liberation Front) è un agente; non ha la forza di sfidare il governo eritreo. Sia nel passato (guerra etio-eritrea 1998/2000) che nel presente, sta eseguendo gli ordini di altre forze che lo sostengono.
La lotta del popolo e del governo dell’Eritrea è anche la vostra lotta. Dovresti esserne orgoglioso. Dovresti capire che il governo eritreo sta vincendo sopportando tutte le sanzioni e le sfide non contro il TPLF ma contro il mondo.
Dovresti esserne orgoglioso se sei eritreo.
Un uomo anziano ha detto: “Noi (il popolo di Irob) ci siamo abituati alla democrazia illimitata sotto la guida del TPLF. Ora ci stai dicendo che siamo sotto la tua amministrazione. Ma non sarai in grado di tollerare i nostri modi”. Questo discorso è ciò che continua ad essere propagato. Quando camminiamo su questa terra di martiri, la camminiamo dolcemente. Ma ciò che sta arrivando da questo lato (TPLF) è davvero spregevole. Siete persone. Ma questo è territorio eritreo. Se siete eritrei dovete difendervi da ciò che arriva dall’altra parte e collaborare con l’esercito eritreo.
Ciò che viene riferito è che non c’è nessuno dell’Irob che fornisca informazioni o collabori con l’esercito eritreo. Lo indagheremo.
Inoltre si dice che gli Irob, pur considerandosi eritrei, hanno dei disaccordi con il governo eritreo per quanto riguarda gli aiuti umanitari e il servizio nazionale. Ma se siete eritrei, che vi piaccia o no, dovrete affrontare le cose che ogni eritreo sperimenta.
Durante la lotta armata, i combattenti che si sono uniti alla lotta eritrea da Irob hanno compiuto il loro dovere nazionale e sono stati martirizzati. Sebbene, durante la guerra, la terra (di Irob) possa, in momenti diversi, essere passata di mano tra l’Eritrea e il TPLF, voi sapete che i vostri figli e fratelli hanno pagato sacrifici per l’Eritrea durante la lotta armata.
Se c’è qualcuno che crede di essere etiope, il governo eritreo non costringerà nessuno a rimanere qui. Ma questo territorio appartiene all’Eritrea. E gli eritrei risiedono sul territorio eritreo. E gli eritrei devono rispettare il dominio eritreo come gli altri popoli (eritrei). Se c’è la carestia, dovresti morire di fame come tutti gli altri. Se arrivano alcuni chicchi, li dividi con loro e vivi così. Non ci sarà alcuna preferenza.
Per quanto riguarda la sicurezza in particolare, ha prevalso l’illegalità. Vengono da Adigrat e qui trascorrono la notte; partono da qui e trascorrono la notte a Senafe. E tu non ci riferisci questo. A meno che tu non fornisca informazioni, il servizio sociale che hai richiesto non verrà fornito. Se difendete la vostra Patria (Eritrea) e il vostro territorio, vi sarà fornito un servizio sociale adeguato perché potrà continuare a preservare la sua pace. Se non collabori, però, le tue richieste non verranno soddisfatte. Quindi, chi soffrirà? Sei tu che soffrirai.
Ognuno deve mettere in sicurezza il proprio territorio. Se assistono a un movimento inappropriato (devi segnalarlo). Operatori sanitari e soldati, che non sono originari di questa zona, sono di stanza qui per 24 ore lasciando dietro di sé la famiglia e il matrimonio. Questo per soddisfare le vostre esigenze di salute e sicurezza.
Sono i nativi che conoscono i punti attraverso i quali i nemici potrebbero intrufolarsi. Anche se un’intera brigata dovesse essere schierata qui, senza la vostra collaborazione, non sarebbe possibile portare a termine il lavoro. Anche se tuo fratello dovesse venire da Adigrat, qualunque sia lo scopo della sua visita, devi segnalarlo all’organismo competente. Non verrà giustiziato o ferito. Verrà indagato e trattato solo in conformità con lo scopo della visita.
Se vai ad Adigrat per ricevere aiuti e fornire informazioni riservate ma ritorni qui e quando ti viene richiesto di fornire informazioni su ciò che hai visto lì, dici di non aver visto nulla, la tua [non udibile/fedeltà?] è con il TPLF.
Non c’è differenza tra te e noi. Siete eritrei. Vi trattiamo come gli eritrei ad Adi-Kuala e Senafe, soprattutto da quando è stata istituita l’amministrazione. Ma bisogna rispettare le regole del Paese”
NOTA: Alakalo è lo stesso luogo in cui nell’aprile 2017 la fondazione italiana Butterfly aveva finanziato ed inaugurato un pozzo per l’acqua per la comunità locale di Irob.
Avviso contenuto: The French news service contexte.com has today published the latest Belgian Presidency’s proposal for introducing indiscriminate chat control scanning of private messages for illegal content. The proposal covers the entire …
https://www.patrick-breyer.de
The leaked proposal shows that the core of the EU Commission’s extreme initial proposal is to be retained unchanged, warns MEP and most prominent opponent of chat control Patrick Breyer (Pirate Party):
“As the Council’s legal service has confirmed, the latest move does not change the nature of detection orders. Millions of private chats and private photos of law-abiding citizens are to be searched and leaked using flawed technology, without them being even remotely connected to child sexual abuse – this destroys our digital privacy of correspondence. Despite lip service being paid to encryption, client-side scanning is to be used to undermine previously secure end-to-end encryption in order to turn our smartphones into spies – this destroys secure encryption.
Now is the time to take to the barricades in favour of privacy and secure encryption, because EU governments that have been critical so far are praising the repackaged plans, which means that the blocking minority no longer stands. Not even a written opinion of the Council’s legal service on this obvious violation of fundamental rights has been requested, it seems.
If the EU governments actually go into trilogue negotiations with this radical position, experience shows that the Parliament risks gradually abandoning its initial position behind closed doors and agreeing to bad and dangerous compromises that fundamentally put our online security at risk.”
In detail Breyer criticises the proposed text as follows: „Limiting bulk chat searches to ‘high-risk services’ is meaningless because every communication service is misused also for sharing illegal images and therefore has an imminently high risk of abuse. Ireland – one of the strongest proponents of chat control – would be classifying the major services. In any case, the service used is no justification for searching the private chats of millions of citizens who are not even remotely connected to any wrongdoing.
Informing law enforcement only of repeat hits is also meaningless, as falsely flagged beach pictures or consensual sexting rarely involve just a single photo. The EU Commissioner for Home Affairs has herself herself stated that three out of four of the disclosed chats and photos are not actionable for the police. These algorithms and hash databases are totally unreliable in distinguishing legal from illegal content.”
Breyer’s information portal and document archive on the proposal: chatcontrol.eu
![Screenshot eines Suchergebnisses nach @potus
Darin der Text:
@Potus [mastodon.sovial]
Konto gesperrt](https://poliverso.org/photo/preview/640/14220505 "Screenshot eines Suchergebnisses nach @potus
Darin der Text:
@Potus [mastodon.sovial]
Konto gesperrt")
Heliumfart
in reply to ulaulaman • • •like this
finitely_prolonged e TIMMAY like this.
ailiphilia
in reply to Heliumfart • • •ulaulaman
in reply to ailiphilia • • •like this
TIMMAY e ailiphilia like this.
TIMMAY doesn't like this.
Heliumfart
in reply to ulaulaman • • •ailiphilia likes this.
ulaulaman
in reply to Heliumfart • • •ailiphilia doesn't like this.
Heliumfart
in reply to ulaulaman • • •