A sophisticated threat group, dubbed ShadyPanda, has quietly exploited millions of users across the world by weaponizing popular Chrome and Edge extensions.
The latest security bulletin from Google has brought forth a grim reality for Android users: multiple zero-day vulnerabilities are actively exploited by threat actors, demanding immediate attention.
Nel mondo della criptovaluta, il confine tra privacy e crimine è spesso labile quanto una transazione non tracciabile. Per anni, strumenti come i mixers
Il rifiuto del Dipartimento di Filosofia diventa un caso nazionale: autonomia accademica contro la pressione politica (di Giulio Cavalli – lanotiziagiornale.it) – 29 novembre 2025, Bolo…
noyb ha compilato un rapporto di 71 pagine sulla proposta Digital Omnibus
Vengono analizzate le modifiche rilevanti al GDPR e alla Direttiva ePrivacy. L'analisi riguarda anche l'impatto su interessati, autorità e titolari del trattamento dei dati.
Microsoft’s Azure API Management (APIM) Developer Portal, a platform commonly used for managing and securing APIs, is vulnerable to a significant security flaw that enables attackers to bypass access controls and create unauthorized accounts across d…
The US Patent Office has put forth regulations to end the our ability to challenge improperly granted patents in the Patent Office. These new rules will be a gift to patent trolls by keeping bad patents alive to stifle innovation. As the EFF notes: People targeted with troll lawsuits will be left with almost no realistic or affordable way to defend themselves.
We have until the end of Tuesday, December 2nd to file comments opposing these rules. The Biden administration tried to get these rules passed in 2023, but thousands of people stopped them. We need to stop the Trump administration from getting these rules passed!
The Inter partes review (IPR) process what voted on by Congress in 2013. Congress defined how it should work and who it applies to. The Patent Office must not add additional regulations that limit our access to it. The EFF points out why these rule changes are harmful:
Inter partes review, (IPR), isn’t perfect. It hasn’t eliminated patent trolling, and it’s not available in every case. But it is one of the few practical ways for ordinary developers, small companies, nonprofits, and creators to challenge a bad patent without spending millions of dollars in federal court. That’s why patent trolls hate it—and why the USPTO’s new rules are so dangerous.
IPR isn’t easy or cheap, but compared to years of litigation, it’s a lifeline. When the system works, it removes bogus patents from the table for everyone, not just the target of a single lawsuit.
IPR petitions are decided by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), a panel of specialized administrative judges inside the USPTO. Congress designed IPR to provide a fresh, expert look at whether a patent should have been granted in the first place—especially when strong prior art surfaces. Unlike full federal trials, PTAB review is faster, more technical, and actually accessible to small companies, developers, and public-interest groups.
As an example why we need the IPR process: Personal Audio tried to squeeze royalties from podcasters. Without IPR, EFF would not have been able to challenge their patent and Personal Audio would have continued to shake down podcasters.
Please take a couple of minutes to submit your comments about why we cannot let bad patents slip through unchallenged. You can write your own or use the following draft comment we borrowed from the EFF and modified:
I oppose the USPTO’s proposed rule changes for inter partes review (IPR), Docket No. PTO-P-2025-0025. The IPR process must remain open and fair. The Patent Office does not have the ability to legislate and must not limit who can take advantage of the IPR process beyond what Congress has authorized. Patent challenges should be decided on their merits, not shut out because of legal activity elsewhere. These rules would make it nearly impossible for the public to challenge bad patents, and that will harm innovation and everyday technology users.
or you can use their comment as they wrote it:
I oppose the USPTO’s proposed rule changes for inter partes review (IPR), Docket No. PTO-P-2025-0025. The IPR process must remain open and fair. Patent challenges should be decided on their merits, not shut out because of legal activity elsewhere. These rules would make it nearly impossible for the public to challenge bad patents, and that will harm innovation and everyday technology users.
The 2026 Pirate National Conference has been subject to an elimination style bracket tournament to determine where we will host what will mark the 20th birthday of the United States Pirate Party.
As of today, we are down to four potential cities:
Boston, Massachusetts
Chicago, Illinois
Seattle, Washington
Vicksburg, Mississippi
Results from Round 2 are posted on our Discord server.
Eight other cities were previously in consideration and will no longer be considered for the 2026 conference. The eight eliminated cities, as well as the three cities that shall be eliminated by the conclusion of this tournament, shall be in permanent consideration for future Pirate National Conference locations until they have hosted. Albuquerque, Las Vegas, Louisville, Mobile, New Orleans, Plattsburgh, Portland (OR) and Providence shall all be in consideration in 2027 and beyond.
We now find ourselves in the Final Four, with two matchups this week that our members and supporters can vote on. Boston (1) will take on Seattle (9) while Vicksburg (4) takes on Chicago (6). The Final Four The tournament shall conclude on December 15th.
This tournament ending up in four totally different regions of the country is emblematic of the growth of this party. We might have states with a stronger presence of their Pirate Party, but our growth is nationwide and undeniable. After 20 years, the second oldest Pirate Party in the world will celebrate our conference on a boat and prepare for the next 20 years. We are looking forward to June 6th and hope you all are too.
Regardless of location, the conference will be A.) held on a boat and B.) hybrid, meaning those unable to attend in-person may still attend online.
Those who wish to vote can join our Discord server to find a link to the tournament. The Final Four closes out next week and the championship vote will begin from there.
Giovedì 18 dicembre 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 18 dicembre, alle 18.30, da Sweet Bunch al Pigneto!
Sezione romana di @twcita. Uno spazio per discussioni di rilevanza locale tra tech worker. Pure er posto giusto pe dasse na punta ogni tanto ;) Info & Regolamento: https://t.me/twcitagruppo/80268
Behind the language of “simplification” in the #DigitalOmnibus lies a fast-track to reopening and weakening the #GDPR & #eprivacy Directive, the core safeguards that protect our daily lives.
@itxaso examined the amendments article by article & what it means in real life for data protection (spoiler: more data harvesting, less control)
Individually, these changes are worrying. Together, they amount to a structural weakening of Europe’s privacy framework.
Digital Omnibus – A Single Rulebook or a License to Trespass Fundamental Rights?
What is Digital Omnibus?
Digital policy lobbies across the European Union are buzzing with one word: Digital Omnibus, a proposal aimed at consolidating and simplifying the existing EU digital framework. The idea, according to the proposal’s advocates, is to reduce overlap in obligations and the compliance burden on businesses.
Clarifying GDPR concepts such as pseudonymised vs non-personal data
Allowing limited use of sensitive data for detecting AI bias
Adjusting some obligations under the AI Act and delaying certain requirements
Creating a European Business Wallet for corporate digital identities
Merging various data laws into a more unified Data Act
Introducing a single entry point for cybersecurity incident reporting
These are framed as efficiency measures, cost-reduction initiatives, and efforts to make Europe more attractive to digital innovation.
Critics Warn: What Does Streamlining Actually Mean for OurRights?
For policymakers looking at the issue from strictly a business perspective, the digital Omnibus is a proposal long overdue. But as with any sweeping reform, the details matter, and this is where the debate becomes intense.
This is where concerns sharpen, especially among civil society groups, privacy advocates, and parties committed to defending digital freedoms such as the European Pirates.
European Digital Rights (EDRI) and other Digital rights advocates warn that simplifying the rulebook will come with a quiet erosion of our rights that were hard-won over the past decade.
Key Concerns Raised Against the Digital Omnibus
1. Roll-Back of Digital Protection Laws
The Omnibus is seen as reopening and weakening major protections, including the GDPR, ePrivacy, and the AI Act. This is viewed as a blow to the decades of work on digital rights.
2. Weakening of ePrivacy Rules
According to EDRi, the proposal would shift some “device access” rules from ePrivacy into GDPR, reducing mandatory consent in some cases. It is feared that this could permit tracking on devices without users’ explicit approval.
3. Narrowing the Definition of “Personal Data”
A redefinition of personal data could give companies more leeway to process information. Critics argue that this redefinition could reduce transparency and control for individuals.
4. Undermining AI Accountability
According to TechPolicy.Press article, amendments that give AI providers too much discretion, including a loophole that allows them to opt out of certain “high-risk” obligations without publicly declaring it. Rights groups argue this removes a key transparency check, weakening the AI Act’s purpose of managing risk.
5. Privileging Business Over People
Supporters of digital rights strongly believe that these reforms will shift power toward companies, thereby reducing individuals’ leverage under data protection laws. Precisely, these reforms have corporate interests as their focal point rather than citizens’ rights.
6. Weak Democratic Process
The way Omnibus is being fast-tracked with limited consultation and impact assessment, EDRi and others argue that such sweeping changes deserve more thorough democratic scrutiny.
7. Risk to Minoritised and Vulnerable Groups
EDRi highlights that under the proposed changes, marginalised communities could face a higher risk of profiling or automated discrimination. Reduced oversight and transparency could make it harder to challenge unfair or biased automated decisions.
So, Where Does This Leave Us?
For the European Pirates, the question is not whether Europe should innovate, but how. Efficiency cannot come at the cost of loosening the protections that set the EU apart in the global digital landscape.
The Digital Omnibus, on the surface, may appear to be an effort to overcome the hurdles that impede the EU’s innovation and growth. However, the implications of this proposal have far-reaching consequences from a social perspective.
The debate around the Digital Omnibus is only beginning. What is at stake is the balance between modernising Europe’s digital framework and guarding the rights of the people who live within it.
Across Europe, a new concept known as chat scanning has entered the public debate. Supporters claim it will protect children from online harm. Chat control is formally part of the Child Sexual Abuse Regulation (CSAR), aimed at combating CSAM (child sexual abuse material). However, many experts, privacy groups, and digital rights advocates warn that it poses a greater risk for everyone who uses a phone, especially young people who message daily.
What is chat scanning?
In simple terms, it is a system that checks your private messages before or as soon as you send them. The app you use would need to scan your texts, photos, or videos and determine whether they seem suspicious. If the scanner thinks something is “unsafe,” it can report the sender, even if the message was completely innocent.
This means the scanning occurs within your phone, not on a server elsewhere. Every typed or uploaded message is checked before it reaches a friend or family member. It is like having a digital security guard watching over your shoulder every time you write something personal.
For digital rights advocates, including the Pirate Party, this raises a serious concern: privacy is not something that can be switched on and off. Once a system is built to monitor everyone’s conversations, it becomes a permanent gateway to surveillance. It does not take much for such tools to be expanded, misused, or accessed by actors who do not have the public’s interest at heart.
Why Chat Control Is a Real Threat
Chat control systems are not theoretical risks. Automated scanners genuinely make mistakes. They often cannot understand teenage slang, humour, or personal images. A tool meant to protect vulnerable users can easily turn into one that falsely accuses innocent people. Meanwhile, determined bad actors can simply switch to apps that do not follow these rules, while ordinary citizens remain under constant monitoring.
This approach also weakens secure communication. End-to-end encryption is designed to protect everyone from hackers, identity theft, and even misuse of state power. Scanning messages before they are encrypted breaks that protection. Instead of keeping society safe, it exposes activists, families, journalists, and children to new dangers.
The Ripple Effect on Democracy
If chat controls become law with a full majority, the long-term consequences could spread slowly but deeply. The ripple effect would impact multiple pillars of democracy.
Privacy Erosion
What begins as limited scanning to target harmful content can gradually expand to include most users. When every message is subject to scrutiny, personal privacy is the first casualty.
Overwhelmed Law Enforcement
A flood of false positives would strain police resources. German experts who reviewed the proposal warned that law enforcement would be unable to handle the volume of inaccurate reports. This waste of time and energy increases the risk of people being wrongly investigated or prosecuted, ultimately making the public less safe.
Chilling of Free Expression
Journalists, activists, and vulnerable groups may start to self-censor because they no longer trust their communication channels. When private conversations feel monitored, open dialogue becomes rare.
Decline in Civic Participation
As trust in institutions weakens, people may disengage from democratic processes. Press freedom declines, and political debate becomes less open.
Shift in Social Norms
Over time, society may begin to accept the idea that monitoring private digital spaces is normal. Such a shift can alter the social contract itself, making surveillance an everyday expectation rather than an exception.
This is how a policy introduced in the name of protection can gradually erode the foundations of democracy.
Are there safer alternatives?
There are better ways to keep communities safe. Targeted investigations, stronger reporting channels, improved child protection services, and investment in digital literacy can genuinely support vulnerable groups without breaking the fundamental right to private communication.
Europe should not accept a future where every phone becomes a checkpoint. Safety should be built on rights, not surveillance. Protecting children and protecting privacy are not opposing goals. With smart policy and responsible technology, the EU can and must do both.
The drive to protect minors online has been gaining momentum in recent years and is now making its mark in global policy circles. This shift, strongly supported by public sentiment, has also reached the European Union.
In a recent development, Members of the European Parliament, as part of the Internal Market and Consumer Protection Committee, approved a report raising serious concerns about the shortcomings of major online platforms in safeguarding minors. With 32 votes in favour, the Committee highlighted growing worries over issues such as online addiction, mental health impacts, and children’s exposure to illegal or harmful digital content.
What Is In The Report
The report discusses the creation of frameworks and systems to support age verification and protect children’s rights and privacy online. This calls for a significant push to incorporate safety measures as an integral part of the system’s design, within a social responsibility framework, to make the internet a safe environment for minors.
MEPs have proposed sixteen years as the minimum age for children to access social media, video-sharing platforms, and AI-based chat companions. Children below sixteen can access the above-mentioned platforms with parental permission. However, a proposal has been put forth demanding that an absolute minimum age of thirteen be set. This indicates that children under 13 cannot access or use social media platforms, even with parental permission.
In Short:
Under 13 years of age: Not allowed on social media
13-15 years of age: Allowed with parents’ approval
16 years and above: Can use freely, no consent required
MEPs recommended stricter actions against non-compliance with the Digital Services Act (DSA). Stricter actions range from holding the senior executives of the platforms responsible for breaches of security affecting minors to imposing huge fines.
The recommendations include banning addictive design features and engagement-driven algorithms, removing gambling-style elements in games, and ending the monetisation of minors as influencers. They also call for tighter control over AI tools that create fake or explicit content and stronger rules against manipulative chatbots.
What Do Reports And Research Say?
The operative smoothness and convenience introduced by the digital and technological advancements over the last two decades have changed how the world works and communicates. The internet provides a level field for everyone to connect, learn, and make an impact. However, the privacy of internet users and the access to and control over data are points of contention and a constant topic of debate. With an increasing percentage of minor users globally, the magnitude of risks has been multiplied. Lack or limited awareness of understanding of digital boundaries and the deceptive nature of the online environment make minors more susceptible to the dangers. Exposure to inappropriate content, cyberbullying, financial scams, identity theft, and manipulation through social media or gaming platforms are a few risks to begin with. Their curiosity to explore beyond boundaries often makes minors easy targets for online predators.
Recent studies have made the following observations (the studies are EU-relevant):
According to the Internet Watch Foundation Annual Data & Insights / 2024 (reported 2025 releases), Record levels of child sexual abuse imagery were discovered in 2024; IWF actioned 291,273 reports and found 62% of identified child sexual abuse webpages were hosted in EU countries.
WeProtect Global Alliance Global Threat Assessment 2023 (relevant to the EU) reported an 87% increase in child sexual abuse material since 2019. Rapid grooming on social gaming platforms and emerging threats from AI-generated sexual abuse material are the new patterns of online exploitation.
According to WHO/Europe HBSC Volume on Bullying & Peer Violence (2024), one in six school-aged children (around 15-16%) experienced cyberbullying in 2022, a rise from previous survey rounds.
These reports indicate the alarming situation regarding minors’ safety and reflect the urgency with which the Committee is advancing its recommendations. Voting is due on the 23rd-24th of November, 2025.
While these reports underline the scale of the threat, they also raise an important question: are current solutions, like age verification, truly effective?
How Foolproof Is Age Verification As A Measure?
The primary concern in promoting age verification as a defence mechanism against cybercrime is the authenticity of those verification processes and whether they are robust enough to eliminate unethical practices targeting users. For instance, if the respondent (user) provides inaccurate information during the age verification process, are there any mechanisms in place to verify its accuracy?
Additionally, implementing age verification for children is next to impossible without violating the rights to privacy and free speech of adults, raising the question of who shall have access to and control over users’ data – Government bodies or big tech companies. Has “maintenance of anonymity” while providing data been given enough thought in drafting these policies? This is a matter of concern.
According to EDRI, a leading European Digital Rights NGO, deploying age verification as a measure to tackle multiple forms of cybercrime against minors is not a new policy. Reportedly, social media platforms were made to adopt similar measures in 2009. However, the problem still exists. Age verification as a countermeasure to cybercrime against minors is a superficial fix. Do the Commission’s safety guidelines address the root cause of the problem – a toxic online environment – is an important question to answer.
EDRI’s Key arguments:
Age verification is not a solution to problems of toxic platform design, such as addictive features and manipulative algorithms.
It restricts children’s rights to access information and express themselves, rather than empowering them.
It can exclude or discriminate against users without digital IDs or access to verification tools.
Lawmakers are focusing on exclusion instead of systemic reform — creating safer, fairer online spaces for everyone.
True protection lies in platform accountability and ethical design, not mass surveillance or one-size-fits-all age gates.
Before floating any policy into the periphery of execution, weighing the positive and negative user experiences is pivotal, because a blanket policy based on age brackets might make it ineffective at mitigating the risks of an unsafe online space. Here, educating and empowering both parents and children with digital literacy can have a more profound and meaningful impact rather than simply regulating age brackets. Change always comes with informed choices.
You do research on a product, maybe a pair of shoes, a gadget, or a flight ticket. And all of a sudden, every other ad on your screen is a copy of the same. It is easy and convenient to get over it – until you stop to think: how come the internet knows me so well?
This is not how the periphery of an algorithm works, but a systematically curated process designed to influence user behaviour, shaping not just what we buy, but how we think and choose.
As Europe now discusses “digital sovereignty,” it’s worth asking: who truly holds the reins of your digital life—you, your government, or the tech giants?
A recent article by Politico explains how France and Germany, in alliance with the United States, are championing a “sovereign digital transition,” the idea that Europe must reduce its dependence on foreign Big Tech giants and establish its own technological foundations. On paper, it appears to be a bold step toward autonomy. In practice, however, citizens across Europe are asking: What does this mean for me, my data, my digital life? (archive.ph/k7Nyz)
The Promise of a European Stack – What’s at Stake?
The ambition is high: from sovereign cloud infrastructure to home-grown AI and chip design, the goal is a Europe where tech is owned, governed, and secured by Europeans. But this raises significant questions. Who controls these platforms? Are they built for citizen empowerment or just national-industrial competition? Is “sovereignty” being framed as freedom, or as new walls around users’ data and digital behaviours?
Ground-Level Reality: Data, Dependence, and Digital Discomfort
Commuters from the EU are receiving fines from London’s ULEZ zone even though they never drove there. The cross-border data sharing behind that fine is not some distant regulation—it’s a personal intrusion. (Source: Guardian – theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/j…? | archive.ph/s9EBF)
DataReportal’s “Digital 2025: Online Privacy Concerns” section highlights that in Europe, the number of connected adults worried about how companies use their personal data is a meaningful trend (although slightly down from previous years). (Source: Dataportal – datareportal.com/reports/digit… | archive.ph/vOwZp )
A case where the European Commission was ordered to compensate a citizen for improperly transferring his personal data outside the EU, illustrating how even high-level institutions can breach data-protection rights. (Source: Brussels Signal – brusselssignal.eu/2025/01/eu-c… | archive.ph/bN5lF)
These stories illustrate that what starts as “digital sovereignty” in high-level Brussels dialogue ends up in your bank records, your home, and your social feed.
Where Sovereignty Risks Turning Into Surveillance
According to the Politico piece, Europe’s push to take control of its tech stack is partly a response to U.S. dominance. But replacing one system with another raises the same concerns:
Will European infrastructure keep privacy at the centre, or will it become just another corporate/state-controlled ecosystem?
When national or bloc-level systems enforce age checks, data localization, and surveillance capabilities, will citizens gain freedom or lose it?
The Pirate Perspective: Tech for People, Not Power
For the European Pirates Party, the question isn’t whether Europe should build tech. It’s how and for whom. True sovereignty starts with the user’s choice, not just the state’s contracts and cloud servers.
Digital freedom means:
Transparent platforms where citizens can inspect how their data is used.
User-controlled infrastructure, where opting out isn’t a penalty.
Open standards and interoperability, rather than locked-in systems that create new dependencies.
Governance by citizens, not just by ministers or industrial lobbyists.
What It Means For You
Ask: Who owns the cloud where your photos are stored? If Europe builds its own stack, will you still have the right to move your data freely?
Watch for: Platforms that claim “European control” but push the same manipulative algorithms and business models as before.
Insist on: User education and choice because no matter how sovereign the tech gets, if you don’t understand it, you are still powerless.
Final Word
Europe’s digital sovereignty drive is exciting and potentially transformative. Europe’s digital sovereignty drive is exciting and potentially transformative. However, if it continues without electing citizens to govern, we risk establishing a “sovereign tech” environment that denies users authority.
The Pirates’ message is unmistakable: sovereignty devoid of popular authority is merely another form of reliance. Let’s ensure that users, not tech companies or anyone else, own the data revolution.
The Netherlands once again finds itself at a political crossroads. Less than two years after a coalition government collapsed under the weight of internal tensions, Dutch voters are preparing to decide what kind of leadership they want for their future.
On the 29th of October, Dutch people will be going to the polls to elect a new Tweede Kamer (Dutch lower house). Initially, the next elections were scheduled for 2028, but due to the fall of the 2024 cabinet, snap elections were called for.
On the 3rd of June, Geert Wilders, leader of the far-right conservative party PVV (Party for Freedom), walked away from the coalition due to different views on asylum policies. The cabinet led by Dick Schoof as prime minister ended with his resignation. The upcoming elections thus pose an opportunity for voters to shape the composition of their parliament anew.
The elections held in November 2023 led to talks that concluded in 2024, with the coalition appointing the independent Schoof as prime minister. The coalition was formed by the Party for Freedom (PVV), the largest party in the House of Representatives, with the People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD), New Social Contract (NSC), and the Farmer–Citizen Movement (BBB). The coalition was marked by its delicate nature and Wilders’ inability to converse with his fellow coalition members, often alienating them due to his narrow, inflexible views on migration, asylum, and social policies.
As the elections approach, a first debate was held on the 12th of October. It was expected that the populist nature of Wilders would take centre stage; however, he withdrew from the campaign and did not participate in the debate. [Earlier in the week, he had been mentioned in the list of targets of a terrorist group, and so, for security reasons, he decided not to participate in the debate, even after the group had been arrested, security had confirmed it to be safe, and possibilities for venue changes and online allocations were suggested.] In his absence, the leader of D66 (Democracy 66), Rob Jetten, joined in his place.
The debate featured Dilan Yeşilgöz, the leader of VVD (People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy, a conservative-liberal party), Henri Bontenb from CDA (Christian Democratic Appeal), Frans Timmermans from the recently combined GroenLinks-PvdA party (social democracy, green politics), and Rob Jetten. Key debate topics included asylum policies, how to address the current housing crisis, health care practices, and issues in Gaza. Despite party leaders fixating on the language of the debate rather than the policy proposals and personal attacks, the key topics of the election agenda were raised.
Given Wilders’ absence from this weekend’s debate, other party leaders had the opportunity to present their positions more prominently. This offers a hopeful outlook, as his strongly right-aligned views were not the focal point, allowing voters to engage with other perspectives. Considering Wilders’ rigid stance on migration during the previous government, he may have alienated not only other parties but also segments of his own voter base.
According to polling conducted at the beginning of October (ipsos-publiek.nl/actueel/ipsos…), support for the PVV has declined compared to 2023, yet it remains the most popular party. The most notable change is the decline in support for the VVD and NSC, two former coalition parties. It is also key to highlight the rise in support for CDA, a party that has previously stated its preference to work with the VVD rather than the PVV. The shifting popularity of some parties from the previous coalition may signal a potential change in the composition of the next one. This could be encouraging news: the Netherlands might see a government more centrally aligned in its social and immigration policies and more open to dialogue. While the left and more progressive parties have yet to gain significant momentum (including the Dutch Pirate Party), there remains a possibility for a more moderate, centre-right coalition to emerge (rather than the previous extreme-right one).
With Dutch voters heading to the polls at the end of the month, there is still room for public opinion to evolve and for parties to rethink their alliances. For the moment, there is a cautious hope that the next Dutch government may take a more moderate path.
So how are our Dutch Pirate Party colleagues faring?
"Ik ben fractievoorzitter in het Waterschap Amstel, Gooi en Vecht en heb een achtergrond op het gebied van Kunstmatige Intelligentie.
De Piratenpartij staat voor een vrije democratie waarin iedereen direct toegang heeft tot alle kennis, kunst en cultuur. We investeren in publieke voorzieningen zoals betaalbare woningen, zorg en onderwijs. We vertrouwen elkaar en hebben een gezond wantrouwen tegenover de macht van overheden en bedrijven."
"Het ondersteunen van burgerrechten, directe democratie, databeveiliging, bescherming van persoonsgegevens, transparantie, vrijheid van kennis en informatie, goed toegankelijke onderwijs, universele gezondheidszorg en een stabiel basisinkomen. Dit zijn exact de steken die het huidige kabinet heeft laten vallen!
Daar waar anderen weg lopen, ga ik de strijd aan. Bij de Piratenpartij voel ik daadkracht en integriteit."
Ik ben geboren en wonende in Eindhoven en programmeur van beroep.
Binnen de campagne ben ik iemand die zorgt dat drempels voor activiteiten worden weggenomen in plaats van opgeworpen. Met mijn ervaringen binnen de Piratenpartij help ik ideeën van nieuwe actieve leden tot daadwerkelijke acties te brengen, en ben ik een bron van kennis op het gebied van acties die we in het verleden gedaan hebben.
"Om mezelf recht in de spiegel aan te kunnen kijken, in de hoop op een leven waarvan de balans tussen geven en nemen doorslaat naar meer coöperatie – en daarmee het onderling vertrouwen, verkies ik in ieder opzicht partnerschap. Daarom kies ik voor de partij met de programmapunten die het beste in ons naar boven halen, zoals de invoering van een universeel basisinkomen en de bevrijding van informatie.
"Wat ik vooral belangrijk vind is ervoor zorgen dat er in onze maatschappij internationale solidariteit is en dat er respectvol omgekeken wordt naar mensen in zwakkere posities, zoals bijv jongeren met een vluchtverleden.
Duurzaamheid, corporate sociaal responsibility, mensenrechten, armoedebestrijding en een weerbare digitale samenleving is waar ik me voor wil inzetten. En minder polarisatie graag, ook in de media."
"Ik ben 42 jaar en werkzaam in verschillende sectoren: zorg, kinderopvang en sociaal werk.
Er zijn heel veel dingen die veel beter kunnen in Nederland. Zorg, onderwijs, onderdak en voedselzekerheid zijn cruciaal en ik zal hier dan ook voor strijden. Ik zou namelijk graag in een land willen wonen waar niemand achterblijft en we Nederland eindelijk echt een welvarend land kunnen noemen."
"Vanuit mijn werk als maatschappelijk werker en psychosociaal therapeut zie ik dat de zorg, zowel medisch als het geestelijk welzijn in de knel is geraakt door het huidige beleid. Door de systemen en de macht van de grotere organisaties mis ik de menselijke maat, die men juist nodig heeft als men om hulp vraagt en zich kwetsbaar voelt.
Als ervaringsdeskundige loopt Angeline zelf ook tegen allerlei hindernissen aan, zoals bij de WMO
"Ik ben een functionaris gegevensbescherming bij de overheid met een missie: zorgen dat organisaties niet als rovers omgaan met persoonsgegevens. Privacy en ethiek horen bovenaan de mast.
Ik vaar ook een koers als ondernemer: met mijn handel Hook Solutions verkoop ik haken voor huis, tuin en keuken, en Kapitein Haak-artikelen. Met mijn achternaam kan ik onmogelijk níet met de Piratenpartij meevaren."
"Ik ben sinds 2022 stadsdeelcommissielid in Amsterdam-Noord. Mijn speerpunten zijn behoud van het groen, directe democratie, privacy en sociale verbinding.
Daarnaast ben ik onderzoeker en schrijver.
Ik ben enthousiast, heb een duidelijke mening, kan tegelijkertijd goed samenwerken en de kar trekken. Ik ben kandidaat voor de Piratenpartij, omdat ik denk dat ik goed in staat ben om de partij een gezicht te geven.
"Als software-ontwikkelaar wil ik vrij kennis kunnen delen op het internet. Die vrijheid wordt bedreigd door BigTech. Om monopoliemacht te krijgen misbruiken ze softwarepatenten en auteursrechten.
Monopolievorming speelt niet alleen online, maar in de hele samenleving. We willen vrijheid om mee te doen met de economie en lokale zeggenschap."
Als moeder van kinderen met bijzondere behoeften zet ik me in voor de rechten van personen met een handicap. Ons land voldoet niet aan internationale verdragen zoals de VN-verdragen Handicap en Inzake de Rechten van het Kind.
Mijn prioriteit is om de meest ernstige misstanden in de zorg te bestrijden. Ik pleit voor het aanstellen van een functionerende autoriteit boven de instellingen en organisaties, om menswaardige zorg te waarborgen.
"Veel mensen kennen mij van de markt, uit de zorg, als tegelzetter of goochelaar. Ik heb in elke uithoek van de maatschappij gewerkt.
Sinds 2020 ben ik actief voor de Piratenpartij. Twee jaar lang was ik met veel plezier partijvoorzitter. Er is moed nodig om de huidige problemen op te lossen. Denk aan doorgeslagen bureaucratie, corruptie, inbreuk op privacy van burgers, non-transparantie, milieuvervuiling, ongelijke machtsverhoudingen."
Langetijdpiraat, idealist, en een groot voorstander van gelijkwaardigheid en vrijheid.
"Kennis moet gedeeld kunnen worden anders kan ze niet groeien. Daarbij willen wij kennis kunnen nemen van wat de overheid doet en welke verbindingen er bestaan tussen de overheid en het bedrijfsleven. Wij willen meer privacy voor burgers en transparantie van die overheid en bedrijven.
"Ik kom uit Rotterdam en werk bij Lely waar ik 600+ ontwikkelaars ondersteun bij het bouwen van software.
Ik concentreer me op wat ik het recht op bezit noem. Met name software wordt zodanig geleverd dat het bedrijf achter het product bepaalt hoe, waar en hoelang je hun product mag gebruiken. Het liefst met grove inbreuk op je privacy."
"Ik ben natuurkundige en heb lange tijd als onderzoeker in het ziekenhuis gewerkt. Daar zag ik grote problemen met veilige data-opslag en uitwisseling van gegevens.
Tegenwoordig ben ik docent op een middelbare school in Amsterdam. Ik geef natuurkunde, natuur leven & technologie, en informatica aan vooral de bovenbouw leerlingen Mavo, Havo en VWO."
We stellen de komende dagen alle kandidaten voor, startend bij nr. 33, onze lijstduwer Metje Blaak:
Wat haar aantrekt in de Piratenpartij is “je leven leiden zo als jij dat wilt”.
"Eigenlijk doe ik dat mijn hele leven al. Vandaar dat ik me graag aansluit bij de Piratenpartij, ook zodat ieder vrij is om zich te ontwikkelen en toegang heeft tot techniek en cultuur; of je nou zo arm als een kerkrat bent of rijk."
Mensen zijn de grote drijfveer in mijn leven; eerst als buschauffeur, nu als conciërge op de Hogeschool Arnhem Nijmegen.
Als Piraat verzet ik mij tegen de inperkingen van onze vrijheden. In een ideale samenleving is informatie zo vrij en veel mogelijk beschikbaar voor ons allemaal, kan iedereen anoniem en privé communiceren, is er weinig surveillance en bespaart legalisering en regulering van drugs inzet van politiecapaciteit.
Goof is 36 en zet zich al jaren in als gemeenteraadslid in Doetinchem.
"Als ambulant begeleider in de zorg en werkzaam bij een opvang voor dakloze jongeren heb ik dagelijks te maken met de uitdagingen waarmee mensen in moeilijke situaties worden geconfronteerd. Mijn hart ligt bij degenen die het meest kwetsbaar zijn in onze samenleving, en ik geloof dat we als partij een verschil kunnen maken door voor hen op te komen."
Eskild, ICT’er en vader. Zijn centrale strijdpunten zijn de bescherming van digitale burgerrechten en online privacy voor alle burgers. Hij pleit ervoor dat betrouwbaar breedbandinternet een betaalbare nutsvoorziening wordt. Wikkeling wil dat overheden digitale mogelijkheden beter benutten om het leven van burgers te vereenvoudigen, bijvoorbeeld door het schrappen van overbodige formulieren.
"Ik ben commissielid in Waterschap Amstel- Gooi en Vecht. Na zovele jaren uitkleden van zorg, sociale voorzieningen, drama’s als met de Toeslagenaffaire, vluchtelingen, covid, Groningen, etc. is er, nu gelukkig een nieuwe kans en kunnen we alles op alles zetten om onze thema’s eindelijk naar Den Haag te brengen."
Ook actief bij ATD Vierde Wereld, Stoere Vrouwen, Milieudefensie, Transnational Institute en SOMO,
Dylan is een maker in de brede zin van het woord: dus van realtime calculated 3D-graphics tot lasershows en van lichteffecten tot hardcore tekno.
"In dit proces loop je onherroepelijk tegen juridische grenzen aan van wat wel en niet toegestaan is. Dit is een mijnenveld. De huidige copyrightwetgeving belemmert creativiteit, terwijl deze juist was opgezet om creativiteit te bevorderen."
Peter is al ruim 10 jaar lid van de Piratenpartij en woont in de mooie in Kerkrade.
Hij is ruim 20 jaar geluidtechnicus geweest en daarna journalist en fotograaf voor de jongerensite van Landgraaf en heeft onder andere ook in de Wsw-raad gezeten.
Tegenwoordig maakt hij nog steeds in zijn vrije tijd foto’s onder het creative common licentie model, schrijft wordpress plugins, maakt wordpress templates en werkt als operator in Gronsveld. piratenpartij.nl/kandidaten-tk…
"Geloven in vrijheid en autonomie vooronderstelt dat je het individu vertrouwt en daarom beschermt tegen bemoeienis van de autoriteiten.
Voor een Piraat is de vrije uitwisseling van informatie en ideeën nog steeds essentieel om onzin en onbegrip de wereld uit te helpen – die uitwisseling wordt niet opeens een gevaarlijke bron van desinformatie en extremisme omdat ze zich online afspeelt. Daarom pleiten we zo hard tegen censuur en voor privacy online".
Ron Smit (1964) heeft de opleiding Informatica Technologie aan de universiteit in Amsterdam gevolgd. Hij is mede-oprichter van de Basisinkomen Partij in 2013. Ron onderzoekt nieuwe technologische ontwikkelingen in de wetenschap en is ook radiozendamateur (piraat).
"Tussen 1990 en 1994 was ik raadslid in stadsdeel de Pijp. Ik woon nu in de Rivierenbuurt en zet me nog steeds in voor een leefbare buurt. Directe communicatie, dialogen en samenwerking met geestverwanten."
"Ik vind dat de regering bewoners meer kansen moet aanreiken om macht in eigen handen te kunnen nemen wanneer het niet goed gaat in buurten of wijken."
"Als advocaat en ex-wethouder vecht ik voor jouw digitale rechten. Voor transparantie en de digitale underdog.
Als Piraat wil ik opkomen voor de digitale burgerrechten van iedereen en met mijn juridische kennis wil ik helpen aan het ontwikkelen en realiseren van die digitale burgerrechten. Mét de Piratenpartij zal ik bijdragen aan die digitale empowerment."
Live du mercredi 26 novembre - Faire face à la fascisation des médias
Cette semaine, nous avons reçu Soizic Péniquaud, chercheuse indépendante, militante féministe et pour l'accès aux droits, cofondatrice de l'ODAP et Clément Pouré, journaliste indépendant. Pour voir la rediffusion du live, rendez vous sur notre chaîne Peertube et Youtube ! video.lqdn.fr/w/7TPokErFmR93Si…
C'EST PAS DE
L'IA
Quand on entend parler d'intelligence artificielle, c'est l'histoire d'un mythe moderne qui nous est racontée. Celui d'une IA miraculeuse qui doit sauver le monde, ou d'une IA douée de volonté qui voudrait le détruire.
Die Piratenpartei kämpft weiter für den Zusammenhalt der Bevölkerung, die gesellschaftliche Resilienz und damit für ein vernünftiges Milizsystem. Das heutige Stimmresultat zur Service Citoyen Initiative zeigt deutlich, wie stark die Bevölkerung mit halbgaren Argumenten verunsichert wurde.
Unsere Initiative hat viele richtige Antworten auf die Herausforderungen der Gegenwart und Zukunft geliefert. In Europa herrscht Krieg. Das Schweizer System ist zur Bewältigung von vielen Krisen schlecht vorbereitet, denn es ist im letzten Jahrtausend steckengeblieben. Der Baustein des „einzig wahren Wehrdienstes“, und damit der vorgegebene Weg über den Militärdienst, ist nicht mehr zeitgemäss.
Aktuell versuchen Bund und Behörden durch Aktivismus von den wahren Problemen abzulenken: Der Initiative wurden „hohe Kosten“ vorgeworfen, doch neuerdings soll die bestehende Armee durch eine höhere Mehrwertsteuer für alle finanziert werden, über doppelt so teuer wie Service Citoyen gewesen wäre. Beschaffungsprobleme des Militärs wie bei den Drohnen oder den überteuerten Fahrzeugsanierungen werden seit Jahren bewirtschaftet statt gelöst. Und den Fachkräftemangel im Militär versucht man neuerdings mit Aushebungs-Aufgeboten für Frauen zu lösen statt unser Milizsystem grundsätzlich zu verbessern.
Jorgo Ananiadis, Präsident der Piratenpartei Schweiz: „Alle Argumente von den Gegnern der Initiative wurden während dem Abstimmungskampf von ihnen selbst laufend gezielt hintertrieben. Moralisch haben wir also gewonnen und einige erste Reaktionen bei Bund und Behörden ausgelöst. Darauf bauen wir auf, denn die Piraten fordern auch zukünftig bessere Resilienz gegen die akuten Bedrohungen.“
Come l'ICE sta diventando una forza di polizia segreta sotto l'amministrazione Trump
La polizia segreta è una caratteristica essenziale dei regimi autoritari. Dal Servizio di Sicurezza dello Stato dell'Azerbaigian alla Central Intelligence Organization dello Zimbabwe, queste agenzie prendono di mira oppositori politici e dissidenti attraverso sorveglianza segreta, incarcerazione e violenza fisica.
The US Immigration and Customs Enforcement meets most criteria that have defined secret police forces in authoritarian regimes. And the worst may be yet to come.
@filobus sono molto peggio in realtà, perché hanno potuto disporre fin da subito del supporto governativo sia in termini di legittimità, sia in termini di accesso ai dati governativi. Le SS Infatti inizialmente non erano un corpo dello Stato, mentre Ice è un'agenzia governativa
🔞 Alterskontrolle 🆔 soll VERPFLICHTEND für alle 📧 E-Mails, 💬 Messenger & 🗨️ Chats werden! 😱 ⚠️ Der wohl größte Anschlag 💣 auf digitale Anonymität aller Zeiten! 🚫👀
Das geplante EU-Gesetz zur Chatkontrolle bedroht die Privatsphäre und öffnet die Tür zur Massenüberwachung, warnt Patrick Breyer, Digitalrechtsexperte, im Interview.
Allerdings würde ich auch nicht gerade die Berliner Zeitung hofieren, die nur dann Dinge skandalisiert, wenn sie dem eigenen Ziel dienen – Deutschland destabilisieren.
Was ist eure Idee zum Kinder- & Jugendschutz? Bitte nicht "Medienkompetenz". Erwachsene kriegen keinen kompetenten Umgang mit dem Netz hin aber Kinder sollen es schaffen. Wie wollt ihr das Netz Kinderkompatibel machen?
War das nicht so, dass diese Alters-Bestätigungs-Tokens keinen Rückschluss auf die eigentliche ID zuließen? Das ist Kontrolle, sicher, aber Überwachung...? 🤔
Oh man, ich weiß echt nicht, was ich von diesen Meldungen halten soll. Union + SPD machen Bullshit Politik. Die Grünen kommen nicht aus dem Quark.
Das Hauptproblem in unserer Gesellschaft ist die Vermögensungleichverteilung und ein unfassbar ungerechtes Steuersystem.
Einfach gesagt: Einkommenssteuer runter, Vermögenssteuer einführen. Und damit Demokratie stärken. Es gibt keine Partei, die das klar formuliert. Am Ende betreiben alle nur Lobby-Arbeit und gefährden die Demokratie.
I'm now starting to wish the EU was disbanded. The people of Europe are about to be digitally enslaved by ignorant old fossils who don't know anything about the internet or how it works.
Live du vendredi 21 novembre - Sommes-nous à l'heure du technofascisme ?
La semaine dernière nous avons reçu @nastasiahadjadji, journaliste et co-autrice du livre Apocalypse Nerds, comment les technofascistes ont pris le pouvoir, aux éditions Divergences. Pour voir la rediffusion du live en entier, rendez vous sur notre chaîne Peertube et Youtube ! video.lqdn.fr/w/eJoXfAgCgiTg5L…
C'EST PAS DE
L'IA
Quand on entend parler d'intelligence artificielle, c'est l'histoire d'un mythe moderne qui nous est racontée. Celui d'une IA miraculeuse qui doit sauver le monde, ou d'une IA douée de volonté qui voudrait le détruire.
Et tout ça, c'est la conséquence directe et exclusive des choix conceptuels et architecturaux de l'actuel cyberespace appelé internet, imposé par l'Empire, aux forceps, au monde entier, pour assoire sa cyber-domination hégémonique. Ils ont fait d'une pierre deux coups.
Trovate qui la traduzione del post che Patrick Breyer ha pubblicato oggi L’attuale pressione del Consiglio dell’UE per rendere permanente il Chat Control 1.0 (Regolamento (UE) 2021/1232) è giuridicamente ed eticamente sconsiderata. La stessa relazione di valutazione del 2025 della Commissione ammette un fallimento totale nella raccolta dei dati, l’incapacità di collegare la sorveglianza di…
Mercredi 03 décembre - Impossible neutralité de la tech : la fascisation est-elle inscrite dans le code ?
La semaine prochaine, nous recevrons @mathildesaliou, journaliste et auteure de L'envers de la tech et @p4bl0, maître de conférences en informatique. Nous questionnerons l’apparente « neutralité des technologies » en analysant comment la forme qui est donnée aux technologies numériques les met bien souvent au service de la fascisation.
On explorera aussi d’autres façons de concevoir le numérique, menant vers un chemin émancipateur.
Rendez-vous le 03/12 à 19h30 sur Twitch, Peertube et Youtube !
Si l’heure est à l’analyse, le reste de l’année sera à l’action. Vos dons sont cruciaux pour faire fonctionner l’association et pour que nous puissions lutter pour un monde plus libre. Alors si vous le pouvez, faites un don sur laquadrature.net/donner/ !
C'EST PAS DE
L'IA
Quand on entend parler d'intelligence artificielle, c'est l'histoire d'un mythe moderne qui nous est racontée. Celui d'une IA miraculeuse qui doit sauver le monde, ou d'une IA douée de volonté qui voudrait le détruire.
A recent shift in the geopolitically motivated cyber landscape has raised serious concerns as the Handala hacker group launches a targeted campaign against Israeli high-tech and aerospace professionals.
The Pirate Party of the Netherlands has launched a humanitarian campaign to help Ukraine. You can read more about it in detail here: piratenpartij.nl/help-mee-nett…
They are collecting and delivering used fishing nets to Ukraine. The nets are used to protect civilians from drone attacks. Please amplify their message and make a donation. Local volunteers and European partners will help install the nets over streets and public areas. This simple method saves lives. Click on this link to make a donation.
Their first trip leaves in two weeks. They will regularly update their activities so you can see what we do with the donations. They also welcome volunteers to join the transport team. Interested supporters can email info@piratenpartij.nl.
Please help them spread the word across about this project.
Wie beim Klimawandel geht es auch bei der Chatkontrolle nicht um wissenschaftliche Fakten. Die freiwillige Chatkontrolle könnte nach der Faktenlage noch viel unwirksamer sein und würde dennoch weiter vorangetrieben werden - ebenso eine verpflichtende Chatkontrolle (die nur vertagt wurde).
Es geht darum, rücksichtlos die Interessen der herrschenden Klasse durchzusetzen um die Arbeiterklasse, die zunehmend Widerstand gegen Ausbeutung und Faschismus leistet, unterdrücken zu können. Deshalb wird die Chatkontrolle vorangetrieben. Ohne den Sturz des Kapitalismus mit einer internationalen sozialistischen Perspektive wird keine Chatkontrolle und kein anderes Instrument der Massenüberwachung verhindert werden.
Recent developments in Poland have highlighted a disturbing trend – the rise of sophisticated cyberattacks targeting businesses across Europe, with seemingly motivated individuals serving as fronts for broader organized crime networks.
In un’operazione che conferma la crescente sofisticazione della minaccia cyber proveniente da attori legati a stati nazionali, le autorità polacche hanno
Nel panorama della cybersecurity, l’attenzione si concentra spesso sulle vulnerabilità dirette delle piattaforme principali. Eppure, a volte, la minaccia
Live du mercredi 26 novembre - Faire face à la fascisation des médias
Cette semaine, nous avons reçu Soizic Péniquaud, chercheuse indépendante, militante féministe et pour l'accès aux droits, cofondatrice de l'ODAP et Clément Pouré, journaliste indépendant. Pour voir la rediffusion du live, rendez vous sur notre chaîne Peertube et Youtube ! video.lqdn.fr/w/7TPokErFmR93Si…
C'EST PAS DE
L'IA
Quand on entend parler d'intelligence artificielle, c'est l'histoire d'un mythe moderne qui nous est racontée. Celui d'une IA miraculeuse qui doit sauver le monde, ou d'une IA douée de volonté qui voudrait le détruire.
In teoria, Chat Control avrebbe dovuto essere sepolto il mese scorso. Il minaccioso piano dell'UE di scansionare in massa i messaggi privati dei cittadini ha incontrato una schiacciante resistenza pubblica in Germania, con il governo del paese che si è rifiutato di approvarlo. Ma Bruxelles raramente si tira indietro solo perché i cittadini lo chiedono. E così, fedele alla sua forma, una versione rielaborata del testo è già in fase di elaborazione, questa volta nascosta, a porte chiuse.
filobus
in reply to Pirati.io • • •reshared this
Politica interna, europea e internazionale e Pirati.io reshared this.
Pirati.io
in reply to filobus • • •reshared this
Politica interna, europea e internazionale e filobus reshared this.