Umfrage: Hälfte der Deutschen will Verbot der Plattform X bei weiteren Rechtsverstößen
Umfrage: Hälfte der Deutschen will Verbot der Plattform X bei weiteren Rechtsverstößen
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
New York, Feb. 10, 2026 — Deportation proceedings against Tufts University student Rümeysa Öztürk have reportedly been terminated. Öztürk’s arrest in March 2025 and her subsequent 45-day imprisonment and removal proceedings arose from her co-authorship of a pro-Palestinian op-ed in a student newspaper.
Freedom of the Press Foundation Chief of Advocacy Seth Stern said:
“We’re thrilled that the effort to deport Rümeysa Öztürk is over, but remain alarmed and disgusted that it ever happened. Öztürk’s case is arguably the most blatant press freedom violation of this century, and maybe the last century as well. The administration did not even bother to present a pretext for its actions — it arrested her, jailed her in horrific conditions, and sought to expel her solely because she expressed views shared by millions of Americans about one of the most important issues of our time. That the government attempted to characterize mere opposition to Israel’s war as ‘terrorism’ is as chilling as any of the administration’s censorial antics. They went after noncitizens first, not because they have any greater appreciation of the First Amendment rights of citizens, but because they’re the low-hanging fruit. They’d throw out all of us who dissent if they could.”
Please contact us if you’d like further comment.
Al reshared this.
Selbstbestimmungsgesetz in Baden-Württemberg: „Die automatische Datenweitergabe ist ein Skandal“
The Digital Omnibus proposal fails to comply with the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Better Regulation rules, EDRi urged the Council to send the proposal back to the Commission for proper scrutiny and comprehensive assessments.
The post EDRi urged the Council to demand a proper scrutiny of the Digital Omnibus proposal appeared first on European Digital Rights (EDRi).
When it comes to digital rights, the European Union likes to position itself as the leader globally. Ever since the European Union’s data protection regulation, numerous court verdicts that stopped mass surveillance and the charter that established privacy as a fundamental right, the reputation of the European Union as a leader on digital rights has developed over time. Yet at the same time, EU surveillance laws are being expanded quietly – not by way of some big law that grabs headlines but by a growing number of special regulations that give governments access to digital data faster, broader and more often.
Surveillance is increasingly becoming a part of how the EU regulates the digital sphere, shaping laws on national security, online safety, cross-border policing, and digital infrastructure. What we get is a system that recognizes the rights of people, but puts those rights to test in practice. The EU’s highest court has decided more than once that blanket surveillance has no place in the EU.
It was a little more than a decade ago that the European Union’s Data Retention Directive was ruled by the European Court of Justice to be an unlawful interference in private life as it required communication service providers to store all customer data for some period in order to be able to supply this data to state authorities on request. Later, it was also decided by the European Court of Justice that even just communication data like who you contact, when, and from where, can reveal intimate details about people, so that this metadata must also be protected. The court is clear that surveillance has to be targeted, be proportional to what you want to do and you have to have an independent body overseeing it.
What followed was not a step back but a new strategy – which is a part of contemporary European digital lanscape. Older laws required telecoms and platforms to store data systematically; newer directives focus on access rather than collection. Data may no longer be retained by default but it is increasingly reachable through accelerated processes, technical obligations on providers and cross-border requests that bypass older safeguards.
The legal form has changed, while the practical availability of data often has a different shape. To that end, the growing role of private companies is one of the most visible shifts: platforms are becoming gatekeepers of surveillance. EU rules will allow police and prosecutors in one country to request user data directly from service providers based in another; the aim is speed, as investigations should not stall because data sits behind a border. Even though judicial authorisation should remain central, in practice platforms will be the first line of decision-making, required to assess the legality of requests, often within hours and across different legal systems. A second trend reshaping EU surveillance law is prevention: new legislative proposals aim to detect serious harm – such as child abuse material – before it spreads; few dispute the legitimacy of these goals but the challenge lies in the tools required to achieve them.
Detection systems rely on programs that scan traffic, match patterns and watch networks without pause. When governments use them sparingly, the systems still sweep vast stretches of data. Experts and lawyers warn that once the engines start, no simple off switch exists, above all when privacy is required to remain secure.
Europe’s judiciary has consistently opposed generalized monitoring. In matters concerning national security, judges have emphasized that even significant threats do not warrant permanent or indiscriminate surveillance. The conflict is becoming increasingly evident: preventive goals drive the need for continuous oversight, while constitutional principles demand exceptions and restraint.
But courts have made clear that when providers are required to cooperate systematically with public authorities, fundamental rights still apply-regardless of whether the rules are framed as security or infrastructure policy. (e.g., in cases like Privacy International).
As digital governance shifts toward centralised control of networks, the boundary between managing infrastructure and monitoring users becomes harder to define. Formally, the safeguards remain in place. Courts review surveillance measures. Data protection authorities exist. Independent regulators still play a role.
Yet institutional design matters. Recent reforms emphasise coordination, speed, and centralisation. Oversight is increasingly shared between EU bodies, national authorities, and private companies. Responsibility is spread thin.
European judges have consistently emphasized that access to sensitive data must be granted by entities that are both independent and authorized to deny such access. The question remains whether this standard can be maintained as surveillance becomes increasingly integrated into daily digital systems. This does not constitute a clear rejection of privacy or civil liberties.
In theory, EU surveillance legislation continues to adhere to principles of necessity, proportionality, and judicial oversight. The change is more nuanced. Surveillance is no longer perceived as an extraordinary power but rather as a standard aspect of digital governance, embedded within platforms, networks, and international collaboration. For a Union that identifies itself with transparency, individual rights, and an open digital society, the challenge extends beyond mere legal compliance. It involves ensuring that surveillance does not become the default state of online participation. Whether the existing framework achieves that equilibrium, or subtly shifts it, will significantly influence Europe’s digital future more than any individual piece of legislation.
*Mike reshared this.
Executive Summary
The European Pirate Party considers the Commission’s Towards European Open Digital Ecosystems initiative a significant opportunity to strengthen Europe’s technological sovereignty by embedding open-source principles at its foundation. Open source should be regarded as a component of public infrastructure given its contributions to transparency, cybersecurity resilience, and democratic oversight.
To ensure that this objective is effectively implemented, action is required in four priority areas: updating public procurement frameworks to favour open standards; establishing sustainable funding mechanisms for the long-term maintenance and governance of open-source projects; reducing structural reliance on non-EU digital infrastructure; and introducing safeguards to prevent openwashing and undue vendor influence.
In the absence of coordinated EU-level measures, Europe’s developer community may continue to demonstrate strong technical capacity while remaining fragmented, limiting progress toward strategic autonomy and balanced market competition.
Our full submission responds to all five consultation questions, providing evidence-based analysis and specific policy recommendations.
For the complete analysis and supporting recommendations, please refer to the attached document:
Pirate Parties International has increasingly advocated for digital rights in international forums. Our UNHQ representatives presented the importance of digital rights during their 2018 speech at the United Nations Economic and Social Council, and we also published the following statement that year for the Report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.
We emphasize that digital rights are human rights, and global treaties must sanctify those rights and police nation states that both restrict access to digital services and violate privacy. Our digital footprints are more than merely data. They are a part of our person. When we die our digital footprint remains. We must protect our medical records, emails, photos, social profiles, games, and the host of digital records that reflect ourselves in this modern age where a person exists in a digital world that coexists alongside the physical one.
“…you´ll never need to delete another message”
Imagine logging into an old email only to find years of correspondence vanished, or a cherished game erased, or all of your emails, photographs, and files suddenly in danger of being erased if you do not download them from the cloud. Such is the case when service remove free cloud storage that they dangle to attract new users. Remember when Gmail told us that we would never have to erase an email again: “Don’t throw anything away. 1000 megabytes of free storage so you’ll never need to delete another message”.
That amounts to only 1 gb, which they have since expanded to 15 gb for free, but it is still not enough for most people. Furthermore, utilizing free corporate services like Gmail means that you are selling your data to companies and government agencies. We must provide safe and free storage as a human right.
“Social media platforms must ensure that user accounts are preserved.”
Pirate parties have long championed digital rights, privacy, and user sovereignty. It’s time to protect our extracorporeal (beyond body) and posthumous (after death) online existence with a global Digital Legacies Treaty. The core argument of this accord is to protect personal archives. Even if a user is inactive or dead, we must sanctify their digital records. Individuals who are alive must be able to obtain access to their accounts and services. Likewise, next of kin, must have rights to access them. The right to digital services is similar to a child´s need for education but extending over a lifetime and beyond. This act would ensure perpetual access to services and transfer rights, as well as prevent companies from removing access to services that were provided for free (e.g. offering free storage and then changing policy to charge for it). Social media platforms must ensure that user accounts are preserved, unless the user or their next of kin has expressly provided demands to remove them. As social media grows over time, platforms will have distinct incentives to remove the information of users that do not benefit their corporate or political goals. We must ensure that users and user data are not erased in an effort to control the present and our memories of the past.
“Email services and social media platforms must be treated as effective utilities”
To directly tackle corporate arguments that it’s costly to maintain access and preserve user data, a shift in governance regulations is required. Email services and social media platforms must be treated as effective utilities, similar to healthcare and other emergency services. This means that the financial costs required for the services to maintain access to user data would become a government expense, an essential service akin to a military defense budget. In the growing age of AI disinformation, access to an individual´s authentic information is vital towards our survival as a civilization. With this, investments must be made to ensure that only public information remains and an individual´s privacy is respected.
When platforms shutter, data often evaporates. Projects, such as the Internet Archive´s Wayback Machine, UNESCO´s Memory of the World, and the EU´s Europeana archive play a crucial role in preserving our shared digital heritage. Prior global initiatives, such as UNESCO´s Charter on the Preservation of Digital Heritage, are non-binding or lack enforcement mechanisms, resulting in limited scope and uneven implementation. As a result, a large chunk of our collective personal memories are cremated, often while we are still alive. The Digital Legacies Treaty aims to address this with structured procedures. First, it will mandate bailout, takeover, or merger options to keep services alive, prioritizing user data continuity over profit. If that’s impossible, it would require donation of archival data to trusted GLAM institutions (galleries, libraries, archives, and museums). Aside from the ongoing global projects listed above, viable national recipients include the National Diet Library of Japan, the Bibliothèque nationale of France, and the National Archives of the USA. Collaboration between national and global parties will ensure humanity does not experience a digital dark age.
“ National Legacy governance acts will likely precede any successful supranational treaty.”
Finally, we cannot trust that a global Digital Legacies Treaty will be effectively implemented in our lifetimes. National Legacy governance acts will likely precede any successful supranational treaty, and even such reforms may never be sufficient. For the time being, we encourage the public to preserve your own records. Create manual backups on good storage. Remember that even the best hard drives have limited durability. Please consider creating memory disks and other long-term storage. While we often believe that we are living in the modern age, in fact we are at the dawn of the digital age. Our generation is among the first to be able to have digital records that can be preserved forever. We believe that our digital records are important. They are our collective memory preserved for the future. Ultimately, we are responsible for preserving our own memories. And to do so, we must make a global united stand to ensure that our online lives are protected in the same way as our physical ones. We hope that more policymakers, tech leaders, and individuals will join us in this fight. Contact your representatives, share this vision, and demand a web that respects our legacies. Our digital souls depend on it.
————————————————————————————————–
The following message was prepared by members of the PPI Discord community. It does not necessarily reflect the views of all PPI members, but we hope it does. If any of our members have competing ideas about this issue or any other issue that they would like us to broadcast, please share them with us. We are happy to broadcast a variety of ideological opinions and diverse issues. Our goal is to create positive communication to solve problems.
@politics
europeanpirates.eu/european-pi…
Executive Summary The European Pirate Party considers the Commission’s Towards European Open Digital Ecosystems initiative a significant opportunity to strengthen
@politics
europeanpirates.eu/the-eus-evo…
When it comes to digital rights, the European Union likes to position itself as the leader globally. Ever since the European Union’s data…
Gazzetta del Cadavere reshared this.
Su Instagram e Facebook la parola democrazia può essere problematica
Meta ha recentemente vietato la pubblicità politica sulle sue piattaforme. La società statunitense sta utilizzando questa misura per sfidare una nuova normativa UE. Questa azione non solo ha un impatto grave sulle organizzazioni della società civile, ma potrebbe anche rendere più difficile il lavoro di aziende e musei.
netzpolitik.org/2026/werbung-a…
Vor kurzem hat Meta auf seinen Plattformen politische Werbung verboten. Der US-Konzern will damit einer neuen Verordnung der EU trotzen.netzpolitik.org
reshared this
🍹 Log Out @ Roma
🕒 19 febbraio, 18:30 - 19 febbraio, 21:30
📍 568 Public House, Rome, Lazio
The Pirate Post reshared this.
Giovedì 19 febbraio torniamo con il Logout di TWC Roma, il ritrovo per tech workers che vogliono incontrarsi dopo lavoro: un'occasione per socializzare, conoscersi, parlare del nostro lavoro e come organizzarci nei prossimi mesi!
Ci vediamo giovedì 19 febbraio, alle 18.30, da 568 Public House a Garbatella!
Unisciti al Gruppo telegram!
reshared this
Today (like any other day) we celebrate Safer Internet Day 🥳
When platforms are built to exploit attention & manipulate behavior, we must build digital spaces that empower, protect & respect everyone.
It’s time to stop patching problems, EU lawmakers must ensure:
✅ Platforms are designed for safety & fairness.
✅ Children are empowered, with privacy, agency & their right to participation respected.
✅ Holistic approaches build resilience and prepare everyone to navigate risks safely.
reshared this
Learn about the EU Chat Control proposal and contact your representatives to protect digital privacy and encryption.fightchatcontrol.de
reshared this
Learn about the EU Chat Control proposal and contact your representatives to protect digital privacy and encryption.fightchatcontrol.eu
reshared this
Learn about the EU Chat Control proposal and contact your representatives to protect digital privacy and encryption.fightchatcontrol.eu
Em reshared this.
Learn about the EU Chat Control proposal and contact your representatives to protect digital privacy and encryption.fightchatcontrol.eu
Gianmarco Gargiulo reshared this.
Werbung auf Instagram: „Das Wort Demokratie kann problematisch sein“
Wietze Brandsma 🏴☠️ reshared this.
Il 31 gennaio 2026, a Lubiana, in Slovenia, si è conclusa la 20ª riunione del Consiglio dei Pirati Europei, incentrata su discussione, collaborazione e dialogo politico. Durante la riunione è stato eletto anche il nuovo Board dei Pirati Europei.
La riunione è stata presieduta da @f00l
La riunione è iniziata con la registrazione delle delegazioni e il discorso di apertura del Presidente, seguiti dall'approvazione dell'ordine del giorno.
reshared this
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Washington, D.C., Feb. 9, 2026 — On Friday, Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF) filed an attorney disciplinary complaint against Gordon Kromberg, the federal prosecutor who reviewed and signed the search warrant application targeting Washington Post reporter Hannah Natanson.
The complaint notes that Kromberg appears to have violated an ethical rule that requires lawyers to reveal relevant legal authority to the court, even if it undermines their arguments. Recently unsealed court records disclose what many suspected: The government failed to alert the court that authorized the warrant to the Privacy Protection Act of 1980, a federal law that, in most cases, forbids the use of search warrants for journalistic work product and documentary materials.
The following statement can be attributed to Seth Stern, chief of advocacy for FPF:
“Kromberg and the government omitted a federal law that should have prohibited the raid of Hannah Natanson’s home when applying for a search warrant. That choice now threatens to expose Natanson’s sources and cripple her ability to report, while also sending a warning shot to journalists and whistleblowers nationwide.“Disciplinary bodies cannot look the other way and ignore misconduct that threatens the First Amendment, particularly from an administration with a long history of misleading judges and everyone else. When prosecutors abuse their power to facilitate efforts to silence reporting and intimidate news sources, disciplinary authorities must hold them accountable and impose real consequences.”
Please contact us if you would like further comment.
Big-Tech-Lobbying: Erst machen, dann lieber nicht reguliert werden
Gesetzentwurf: Vorratsdatenspeicherung deutlich länger als drei Monate
reshared this
ICYMI
Even though there was no meeting, there’s plenty to update!
Arizona – AZPP’z first party rally is planned for March 1st from 4PM to 6 PM. They will have a table with all the information provided. Speakers are being lined up and anyone interested in speaking should reach out to do so. Light food and drink will be provided. Further, there are plans on coordinating with other organizers and sending invites to other minor parties.
The state of Arizona has moved the deadline for petition signatures up two weeks, meaning the Blase Henry campaign now is two weeks behind schedule. Instead of the previous deadline of April 6th, it is now March 23rd. The signature threshold is high and the challenge is a tough one, but the Blase Henry campaign is committed to collecting the signatures (currently needing less than 60 per day) and being an option come November. If you are in the Tucson area, we are seeking out volunteers to assist with signature collection!
Illinois – Two volunteers recently worked on the Joey Ruzevich campaign, assisting with handing out literature and canvassing. Joey Ruzevich is presently not a candidate endorsed by the national United States Pirate Party, but is a favorite among Illinois Pirates. Ruzevich is currently running in the Democratic Primary for IL-06 in the U.S. Congress.
Nevada – Hunter Rand will be hosting a Meet and Greet event on February 10th at MF International in Sparks. It is an RSVP event with information in the graphics below.
Pennsylvania – Drew Bingaman recently launched his new campaign website, which you can find here. Speaking of the campaign, there will be two (2) Meet and Greet and Petition Signing events on February 19th in Danville and February 21st in Sunbury, respectively. Information regarding those two events can be found on the Drew Bingaman campaign Facebook page.
Pirate National Committee – there are two (2) vacancies on the Pirate National Committee board, following resignations from our PR Director and Webadmin. The role is expected to be filled by the Feb. 22nd meeting. The Feb. 15th has been moved to livestream, meaning the Feb. 15th and 22nd meetings will both be livestreamed to YouTube.
Pirate National Conference – the Pirate National Conference, marking 20 years of the United States Pirate Party, will be held in Boston, MA on June 6th-7th. Saturday June 6th will commemorate twenty years since the party was founded in Athens, GA on June 6th, 2006. You can expect the 6th to feature more festivities and celebrations, while both days will still heavily feature conference business, including but not limited to electing a new board. Speakers, keynote or otherwise, will be announced in the coming weeks. All Pirate candidates will be offered time to speak.
Super Bowl – Congratulations to the Seattle Seahawks on winning Super Bowl LX, but allow us to take a moment to send our love to Bad Bunny for the Pan-American love letter during his Halftime Performance. Juntos somos América. Hell of a show.
The European Pirates concluded their 20th Council Meeting on 31 January 2026 in Ljubljana, Slovenia, focusing on discussion, collaboration, and policy dialogue. The new Board for the European Pirates was also elected during the meeting.
The weekend started with a pre-event by our Slovenian Pirates on 30 January in the form of a panel discussion titled “Chat Control: A Bad Idea That Won’t Go Away”. The topic was discussed by Markéta Gregorová, Member of the European Parliament; Jasmin Feratović, City Councillor of Ljubljana; and Thomas Kranz, Team Leader of the European Pirates Policy Team. The panel was moderated by Mattias Bjärnemalm, Secretary General of the European Pirates.
The Council Meeting took place on 31 January 2026 and was chaired by Marco Confalonieri. The meeting was held in a hybrid format, with online participants attending via Jitsi. It began with the registration of delegations and the Chair’s opening remarks, followed by the approval of the agenda. The meeting lasted five hours.
A total of 26 delegates attended, representing Pirate parties from different European countries.
The Ukrainian Pirate Community proposed joining as an observer member, and the proposal received favourable votes.
PP-CAT (Pirates de Catalunya, Spain), one of the founding members, proposed becoming an observer member. The proposal was approved by voting.
A motion to adopt statutory changes in compliance with Luxembourgish law and to streamline the organisation’s operations was proposed. The motion was approved. This proposal had previously been presented at the 19th Council Meeting but did not pass due to insufficient delegates in attendance.
Annual reports for 2025, including the annual activity report, financial accounts, and Code of Conduct report, were submitted. The previous Board and the Lay Auditor’s report were formally discharged.
The meeting continued with the adoption of the 2026 work plan and budget.
Following the submission and discharge of reports, elections were held. The 11th European Pirate Party Board was elected. All nominations and voting were conducted via Discourse.
The newly elected Board is as follows:
The 20th Council Meeting concluded after five hours of deliberation, marking an important step in the continued organisational development of the European Pirates. With the approval of statutory updates, the discharge of reports, the election of the 11th Board, and the adoption of key motions, the Council set the course for the organisation’s work in 2026.
The European Pirates extend their appreciation to the Slovenian Pirates for hosting the meeting and to all delegates for their active participation, both in person and online.
reshared this
@politics
europeanpirates.eu/report-on-e…
The European Pirates concluded their 20th Council Meeting on 31 January 2026 in Ljubljana, Slovenia, focusing on discussion, collaboration, and policy dialogue. The…
1/ 🚨 On Friday, the @European Commission preliminarily found TikTok in breach of the #DSA due to the addictive design of its platform.
🎉 We welcome this decision: the DSA was designed precisely to address systemic risks of this kind, and this case has the potential to push platforms to rethink fundamental design choices rather than rely on easy but ineffective quick fixes.
edri.org/our-work/edri-welcome…
EDRi welcomes this preliminary findings and urges TikTok to swiftly mitigate the risks to which its users are exposed.European Digital Rights (EDRi)
reshared this
2/ The Commission's findings highlight a long-standing concern: engagement-optimised design comes at the expense of users’ physical and mental well-being and can pose grave risks to democracy and public debate.
🛑 According to the Commission, features such as infinite scroll, autoplay, push notifications, and highly personalised recommender systems were not adequately assessed by TikTok, and existing risk mitigation measures were found to be insufficient.
reshared this
3/ 🔜 This decision sends a first clear signal that engagement-driven design constitute a systemic risk, an issue we look forward to seeing addressed in the upcoming #DFA.
Fairness must be embedded by default in all digital products & services, ensuring protection for society as a whole. It must be measurable, enforceable & structural across the digital environment, complementing the DSA and closing gaps that systemic design risks currently leave unaddressed.
edri.org/our-work/a-fair-digit…
The European Commission closed its Call for Evidence for the upcoming Digital Fairness Act (DFA) on 24 October 2025.European Digital Rights (EDRi)
Itxaso Dominguez reshared this.
The European Commission preliminarily found that TikTok was in breach of the Digital Services Act (DSA) due to the addictive design of its platform. EDRi welcomes this decision and urges TikTok to swiftly mitigate the risks to which its users are exposed.
The post EDRi welcomes EU preliminary findings on TikTok’s addictive platform design appeared first on European Digital Rights (EDRi).
Verhaltensscanner in Mannheim: Keine Straftaten, aber Kamera-Überwachung
Sousveillance: quando il pubblico sorveglia lo Stato di sorveglianza
In un periodo di ripetuti scontri violenti tra civili e forze dell'ordine federali, in particolare quando coinvolgono agenti del Dipartimento della sicurezza interna, registrare e documentare le loro attività è fondamentale per garantire verità e responsabilità.
thefulcrum.us/civic-engagement…
In a time of repeated violent clashes between civilians and federal law enforcement, particularly involving Department of Homeland Security operatives, recording and documenting their activity is crucial to ensuring truth and accountability.Britton Struthers-Lugo (The Fulcrum)
reshared this
Alla domanda “come affronterebbe il controllo pervasivo del tecnocapitalismo statunitense?” si può provare a rispondere chiedendosi se sia più utile, per affrontare il problema, controllare gli utenti oppure lavorare sulle leve economico-giuridiche che hanno permesso la nascita e il consolidamento degli oligopoli tecnologici.
Qui alcuni appunti su indizi della natura pretestuosa di certi slogan ricorrenti, addotti per giustificare il controllo, e su possibili leve concrete da costruire o da azionare perché, anche quando esistono, restano sistematicamente eluse.
La tutela dei minori è un obiettivo legittimo, ma rischia di venir usato come passepartout per l'identificazione e il controllo generalizzato dell’accesso alla rete e delle comunicazioni private, vd. iniziative come la verifica dell'età e Chat Control 2.0.
La Commissione UE ha pubblicato un modello per la verifica dell’età che, sulla carta, prova a essere rispettoso della privacy dell’utente verso la piattaforma o la app finale [ec.europa.eu/commission/pressc… ma in ogni caso introduce un meccanismo di controllo in accesso. Il modello è costruito sulle stesse specifiche del portafoglio europeo di identità digitale (digital ID wallet / EUDI Wallet) e pensato per integrarsi con esso. Non è difficile intravedere almeno un rischio di slittamento d’uso: ciò che nasce per una categoria di contenuti può diventare infrastruttura di accesso e quindi di sorveglianza [edri.org/our-work/showing-your… e di conseguenza anche di chilling effect, cioè di incentivo all’autocensura e persuasione a non utilizzare spazi digitali perfettamente leciti.
Se davvero l’interesse primario fosse sui minori, si sarebbe dovuto partire dalla scuola. In primo luogo, si sarebbe dovuto evitare di normalizzare ecosistemi proprietari nella scuola (e nell'università). Invece è stato fatto l’opposto: durante e dopo la pandemia, con la DAD, la dipendenza da piattaforme private #GAFAM (Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon e Microsoft) si è consolidata enormemente [altreconomia.it/la-scuola-ital…
La piattaformizzazione (platformisation) dell’educazione è stata presentata e introdotta come una innovazione “neutrale”, come semplice “uso di strumenti digitali”, ma nella realtà è una trasformazione profonda che implica una riorganizzazione della scuola (e del senso della scuola) attorno alla piattaforma stessa. Non è solo una questione tecnica-economica ma ha a che fare con i fini dell’educazione, l’autonomia dell’istituzione, e la forma mentis che coltiviamo negli studenti stessi. Si tratta di una trasformazione che espone la scuola a “una riduzione in chiave utilitaristica” [testoesenso.it/index.php/testo… Inoltre, anche dal punto di vista dell'interesse economico pubblico questa scelta è controproducente perché induce trasferimento di ricchezza della collettività (attraverso la spesa pubblica) ad attori privati extra-nazionali, rinforzando il lock-in tecnologico. Una ricchezza che invece potrebbe alimentare la creazione di infrastrutture e servizi pubblici in un ciclo economico positivo, di sviluppo, per la collettività stessa.
Ovviamente esistono alternative, abilitate dal software libero, da standard aperti e interoperabili e da infrastrutture pubbliche, ma le proposte in tal senso rimangono sostanzialmente inascoltate. Qui un’iniziativa recente ma utile a ricordare che la normativa italiana è già orientata a privilegiare soluzioni non proprietarie, ma raramente viene applicata [softwarelibero.it/sites/defaul…
Perciò, quando si parla di “tutela dei minori” e al contempo li si immerge fin dalla scuola in un ambiente digitale strutturalmente tossico (per es., a rischio estrazione dati e profilazione, a rischio dipendenza tecnologica, per non parlare dei rischi relativi alla qualità e alla natura dell'appredimento) [Vd. come esempio concreto: noyb.eu/it/noyb-win-microsoft-… le priorità andrebbero riviste. Infine, tutto il discorso relativo alla necessità di verifica dell'età ignora le possibilità offerte dagli strumenti di parental control che possono essere utilizzati dalle famiglie. Si dovrebbe lavorare a rendere questi strumenti più incisivi e facili da utilizzare.
Un elemento più antipatico forse da accettare ma reale deriva dal constatare come, dal punto di vista delle istituzioni UE, un ecosistema pienamente plurale e decentralizzato (cosa tecnicamente possibile) sia molto più difficile da gestire. La storia recente (per es. nel periodo pandemico) ci dimostra che la CE preferisce interagire, anche attraverso canali informali [vd. judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-… con un numero ristretto di piattaforme proprietarie per regolare il discorso pubblico. Esiste cioè un incentivo strutturale in tema di “social” a preferire oligopoli digitali perché abilitano scorciatoie politicamente molto appetibili per la moderazione dei contenuti.
Suona bene “take back control”, ma è retorico se a monte non si affrontano alcuni nodi strutturali. Primo, la dipendenza extra-UE lungo tutta la filiera digitale (software, cloud, cybersicurezza, hardware). Uno studio del Parlamento europeo 2025 la mappa in modo esplicito le dipendenze europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/e…
Secondo, gli effetti extraterritoriali delle infrastrutture globali. Qui [roars.it/chi-ha-paura-della-li… ho fatto due esempi, riferendomi al caso di Francesca Albanese e a quello della Corte Penale Internazionale, per mostrare come la sovranità, anche a livello giurisdizionale, possa essere “bucata” grazie alla natura globale/transnazionale dei sistemi e servizi bancari e digitali.
In sintesi, aggiungere “regole” per l’accesso a internet e ai social non scalfisce minimamente le piattaforme oligopoliste. Le regole sono semmai rivolte contro gli utenti, di certo non contro le Big Tech.
Innanzitutto, gli oligopoli non sono un accidente della natura: sono il frutto di scelte normative e politico-economiche (e culturali) che hanno costruito recinti da cui è molto difficile uscire.
Per questo la soluzione non dovrebbe essere cercare di contrapporre a questi “giganti” altri giganti “nostrani” ma smontare le premesse giuridiche su cui si è potuta consolidare la la loro natura oligopolista. È questa natura oligopolista o accentrata (anche statale o unionale) delle tecnologie ad essere di per sé un pericolo per la democrazia, a prescindere da chi le controlla.
La leva tecnico-giuridica è quella che negli USA con il DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) e in Europa con direttive affini sul copyright digitale rende difficilissimo se non rischioso (per il consumatore) se non addirittura proprio illegale aggirare quelle che sono vere e proprie limitazioni d’uso dei propri dispositivi o accesso ai propri dati. Vd. per fare un esempio le ricadute sul tema della riparazione [repair.eu/resources/policy-bri…
Allargo volutamente il discorso ai dispositivi perché, mentre l’UE sta ponendo grande attenzione ai “social”, abbiamo un duopolio Apple/Google a governare il mercato degli smartphone, strumenti che stanno diventando l’interfaccia primaria della vita sociale, economica e politica. @demartin ha scritto un libro proprio su questo, dove mostra come, rispetto al vecchio PC, lo smartphone comprime libertà basilari (installare liberamente, cambiare sistema operativo, manipolare davvero il dispositivo, avere più di un profilo utente per dispositivo – tanto per riallacciarsi al tema della tutela dei minori). Fino ad arrivare al paradosso che siamo noi ad essere posseduti dal dispositivo più che il contrario. [addeditore.it/prodotto/juan-ca… nexa.polito.it/wp-content/uplo…
Le stesse problematiche riguardano un’infinità di oggetti di uso comune e di lavoro il cui controllo viene sempre più esternalizzato dall’utente grazie all’elettronica, al firmware e al governo su cloud. Il che ha anche tutta una serie di ovvie e non positive conseguenze sulla tanto declamata sicurezza, ma il fatto rimane in secondo piano.
Insomma, “riprendere controllo” sul serio vorrebbe dire prima di tutto rimuovere i blocchi giuridici e tecnici che impediscono all’utente di possedere davvero i “suoi” dispositivi e i “suoi” dati. Solo così potrebbe crearsi un mercato plurale e decentralizzato di imprese tecnologiche e comunità che creano servizi e strumenti indipendenti. Cory Doctorow ha presentato una strategia di questo tipo nel caso del Canada, ma è un’analisi che si adatta anche all’UE; è molto interessante e il titolo è significante: “Disenshittification Nation”: [pluralistic.net/2026/01/29/pos…
Sul lato delle piattaforme, qualcosa di realistico e incisivo si potrebbe fare da subito, con volontà politica, a partire da scuola/università e P.A., come primo terreno di decolonizzazione dalle #GAFAM.
In secondo luogo, andrebbero azionati requisiti democratici minimi su tutte le piattaforme online, e tanto più sulle very large.
Requisito minimo #1: per tutte le piattaforme, algoritmi open source realmente ispezionabili/verificabili, perché oggi determinano visibilità, priorità, la formazione delle varie echo-chamber e conseguente polarizzazione degli utenti. Conoscerli e poterli verificare è molto istruttivo, quantomeno, e culturalmente e politicamente importante.
Requisito minimo #2 (il più importante): algoritmi di moderazione “neutrali” salvo la rimozione di contenuti illegali (filiera che peraltro dovrebbe essere sotto il controllo della polizia postale e delle apposite agenzie statali). Per il resto: pluralismo e controllo da parte dell’utente, non “verità d’autorità”.
Infine: alternative concrete alle grandi piattaforme social esistono già. Un esempio di “sistema decentralizzato e plurale” che conosco come utente è Mastodon (Fediverso): software libero, federato, basato su protocollo ActivityPub: abilita un pluralismo reale perché si basa su molteplici istanze/moderazioni e non su un centro unico. Proprio perché pluralista, la moderazione è locale e più frammentata; la scoperta di contenuti richiede maggiore iniziativa da parte dell’utente, la governance è senz’altro più faticosa perché è a carico degli utenti che creano e mantengono le istanze. È il prezzo di non avere un sovrano. Sobbarcarselo, probabilmente, richiede anche un cambiamento culturale.
reshared this
Dichiarazione di solidarietà con i membri e gli alleati dell'EDRi sottoposti a pressioni per il loro lavoro sulla regolamentazione delle piattaforme
La rete EDRi condanna fermamente le pressioni esercitate dall'amministrazione Trump sugli iscritti e gli alleati di EDRi per il nostro lavoro sulla regolamentazione delle piattaforme online.
edri.org/our-work/statement-of…
Statement of solidarity with EDRi members and allies facing intimidation for their work on EU's Digital Services Act and platform regulation.European Digital Rights (EDRi)
Giuseppe likes this.
reshared this
Degitalisierung: Großes Kino
KW 6: Die Woche, als wir in Papieren der 1970er recherchierten
Datenaustausch über psychisch erkrankte Menschen: Die Rückkehr zur Registrierung
Dear Friend of Press Freedom,
Attacks on well-known journalists like Don Lemon are in the headlines, but noncitizens exercising First Amendment rights remain the most vulnerable. Rümeysa Öztürk has been facing deportation for 318 days for co-writing an op-ed the government didn’t like, and journalist Ya’akub Vijandre remains locked up by Immigration and Customs Enforcement over social media posts about issues he reported on. Read on for more on the state of press freedom.
The Department of Homeland Security secretary calls leakers a threat to national security and wants to prosecute them. Federal agents raided Washington Post journalist Hannah Natanson’s home and seized terabytes of data, purportedly to aid their prosecution of leaks.
But much of what the public knows about government agencies like DHS, which includes ICE and Customs and Border Protection, is thanks to whistleblowers and leakers who have exposed the government’s increasingly unlawful conduct as it aggressively enforces immigration law across the country.
Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF) Senior Adviser Caitlin Vogus wrote about a few recent examples.
The public’s outrage about attacks on the First Amendment like Don Lemon’s arrest and, before that, the censorship of Jimmy Kimmel isn’t because everyone protesting is a member of their fan clubs. It’s because people genuinely care about free speech, but with everything else going on, sometimes it takes a celebrity name to get their attention.
That’s why it’s important to keep the outrageous arrests of Lemon and independent journalist Georgia Fort in the news and not let the moment pass. We’re doing our part. Our executive director, Trevor Timm, spoke at the National Association of Black Journalists’ town hall about the arrests. Our chief of advocacy, Seth Stern, wrote for The Guardian and told everyone from CNN to MeidasTouch to legal podcasts and radio shows about how the charges are both legally frivolous and an obviously retaliatory political stunt to intimidate journalists.
Last summer, Shirley L. Smith, an independent investigative journalist from the U.S. Virgin Islands, reached out about her efforts to get lawmakers there to modernize the territory’s public records laws.
Our response was something like, “Where have you been all our lives?” We’ve spent years imploring journalists to advocate for their own legal rights. No matter what one thinks about the place of “objectivity” in contemporary journalism, there’s no need for reporters to let it get in the way of advocating for their own ability to do their jobs.
We spoke to Smith about her campaign for transparency.
Days before the federal government falsely claimed cellphone-brandishing nurse Alex Pretti was a terrorist plotting a “massacre,” a jury in Chicago acquitted Juan Espinoza Martinez on bogus charges of a murder-for-hire plot against then-Border Patrol commander Greg Bovino.
Stern wrote for The Intercept about a recently unsealed court transcript that shows the government used that case as a pretext to convince a judge to obscure an ICE agent’s face during a public court proceeding when his name, face, employment, and location were publicly listed on his LinkedIn page.
Last May, a classified whistleblower complaint alleged misconduct by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and another unnamed federal agency.
The whistleblower should be allowed to share their complaint with Congress. But that’s not what happened. Our Daniel Ellsberg chair on government secrecy, Lauren Harper, has more on how Gabbard, a one-time advocate for whistleblowers, is dodging transparency.
The New York Times
If the Privacy Protection Act of 1980 is going to stop these abuses, Congress must amend it to require that evidence gathered by breaking it is immediately thrown out.
404 Media
If you’re an iPhone user who is at elevated risk, enable Lockdown Mode. If you are an Android user, enable Advanced Protection. Read more tips in FPF’s 2026 journalist’s digisec checklist.
The Dissenter
The threat to press freedom from this case goes beyond seizing devices. The government shouldn’t be physically surveilling journalists.
Wired
The best defense against ICE seizing your camera “is other people recording that action and then being able to use that footage as evidence in court, when you sue them,” said FPF’s Timm.
The Register
ICE wants to buy data from online ads to spy on people. Time to pass the Fourth Amendment is Not for Sale Act.
Quill
The Federal Aviation Administration’s new no-drone zones are “mind-boggling,” FPF’s Deputy Director of Advocacy Adam Rose said.
Columbia Journalism Review
“The big, systematic problems in FOIA predate the Trump administration,” FPF’s Lauren Harper said. “I think it’s fair to say that the Trump administration is making it a hell of a lot worse.”
KCUR
Writing op-eds is not a crime. Someone should tell police in Lenexa, Kansas, and suggest they read the First Amendment.
We spoke to four journalists covering immigration enforcement across the country. Watch our conversation to learn more about reporting on protests and raids, cultivating sources, and reaching the public. Watch the discussion here:
youtube.com/embed/UaNk4eyEKZc?…
RSVP: cpj.org/usjanpaneldata
The EDRi network strongly condemns the pressure of the US Trump administration on EDRi members and allies for our work on online platform regulation.
The post Statement of solidarity with EDRi members and allies facing pressure for their work on platform regulation appeared first on European Digital Rights (EDRi).
Jure Repinc reshared this.
Freiwillige Chatkontrolle: Ausnahmeregel wird zum zweiten Mal verlängert
Digital Services Act: EU-Kommission will TikTok-Nutzung begrenzen
Valutazione e mitigazione del crescente rischio di 0-day scoperti da LLM
«I modelli di intelligenza artificiale sono ora in grado di individuare vulnerabilità di elevata gravità su larga scala. Riteniamo che questo sia il momento di agire rapidamente, per potenziare i difensori e proteggere la maggior quantità di codice possibile finché c'è tempo.»
like this
reshared this
Im Nachgang zur gestrigen Pressemitteilung zum Streit um die mögliche Verlängerung der „Chatkontrolle 1.Patrick Breyer
reshared this
Ecco la mia idea
SEGUE
Guide a Mastodon in italiano o in altre lingue, ne hanno scritte porci e cani, ma quella che state leggendo adesso non è…informapirata
like this
reshared this
In pratica, siccome noi vediamo quelli di Mastodon solo se taggano una comunità Lemmy, potrebbero ricordarsi di scrivere nei loro post il gruppo @caffeitalia@feddit.it così li vediamo anche noi.
Che ne pensate?
like this
reshared this
Caffè Italia reshared this.
ottima idea! Tutti a scrivere su @caffeitalia!!!
Approfitto per farti i miei complimenti, perché ho notato che hai spezzato il mssaggio in due parti e hai scritto un titolo lungo, ma poi hai scritto il resto del testo nel messaggio di risposta che (a differenza del messaggio iniziale) è perfettamente leggibile dagli utenti Mastodon 👍
L'hai fatto apposta, vero?
Caffè Italia reshared this.
Un nuovo disegno di legge presentato all'assemblea legislativa dello Stato di New York imporrebbe alle organizzazioni giornalistiche di etichettare il materiale generato dall'intelligenza artificiale e di sottoporre tali contenuti a revisione umana prima della pubblicazione. Lunedì, la senatrice Patricia Fahy (D-Albany) e la deputata Nily Rozic (D-NYC) hanno presentato il disegno di legge , denominato "The New York Fundamental Artificial Intelligence Requirements in News Act" (in breve "NY FAIR News Act").
niemanlab.org/2026/02/a-new-bi…
Se vuoi conoscere le ultime notizi sulla #IntelligenzaArtificiale, puoi seguire il gruppo @Intelligenza Artificiale
A new bill in the New York state legislature would require news organizations to label AI-generated material and mandate that humans review any such content before publication.Nieman Lab
reshared this
Die Piratenpartei Schweiz hat an der Piratenversammlung ihre Parolen zu den Abstimmungsvorlagen vom 08. März 2026 gefasst:
Individualbesteuerung: Die Gleichbehandlung der Steuerzahler ist sinnvoll. Sie führt zu faireren Abgaben und mehr Unabhängigkeit im Erwerbsleben. Jorgo Ananiadis, Präsident der Piratenpartei: „Die Loslösung vom Konstrukt der Ehe ist zeitgemäss. Die bisherigen negativen Erwerbsanreize auf Zweiteinkommen sind ein alter Zopf und gehören abgeschafft. Die Steuern müssen fair sein und dürfen nicht von individuellen Verträgen abhängen.“
Klimafonds-Initiative: Die Piraten erkennen Klimaschutz als wichtig an, jedoch erachten Sie den Weg der vorliegenden Initiative riskant. Viele Mitglieder befürchten, dass mit der Schaffung solcher Fonds viel Geld in Bürokratie und Administration versickert und eine Klientelwirtschaft erwartet werden kann – wie schon oft gesehen. Um die Klima-Probleme nachaltig zu lösen empfehlen wir jedem, die Pro- und Kontra-Argumente individuell abzuwägen.
SRG-Initiative: Die Piraten anerkennen viele Argumente der Initianten und würden eine deutliche Verschlankung und Fokussierung des Angebots auf Kernbereiche begrüssen. Jedoch sind bei einer so starken Gebührensenkung auch deutlich negative Auswirkungen auf die Schweizer Medienlandschaft zu befürchten. Pat Mächler, Vorstand der Piratenpartei: „Die aktuelle Strategie des Bundes, die öffentliche Berichterstattung der SRG im online-Bereich zu stutzen, ist schädlich und absurd. In den deutschsprachigen Nachbarländern ist der Fokus gerade andersrum.“. Die Piraten bereiten eine Petition vor, bei dem das Thema der Freigabe von öffentlich finanzierten Medieninhalten und die Barrierenfreiheit solcher Produktionen thematisiert wird – im Sinne von „Public money, public content!“
Bargeld-Initiative: Die Piratenpartei unterstützt das Anliegen deutlich, insbesondere weil Bargeld ein inhärenter Bestandteil der Initiative der Piratenpartei auf Digitale Integrität mit ihrem „Recht auf ein Offline-Leben“ ist, siehe https://digitaleintegritaet.ch/feed/
Da der Gegenentwurf den Initiativtext aus unserer Sicht noch etwas konkreter in die bestehende Gesetzgebung integriert, gibt die Piratenpartei dem Gegenentwurf den Vorzug.
Fosca
in reply to EDRi • • •Maki 🔻
in reply to EDRi • • •If you want to make the internet safer, remove monetisation incentives for social media platforms.
Fine platforms actual properly large fines for spreading disinformation and hate, or for not adhering to privacy laws.
Helpful video to watch if you're on the fence about it: youtube.com/watch?v=uDkyP37JgY…
- YouTube
youtube.com