CSAM: Ministerien verrühren „Löschen statt Sperren“ mit Vorratsdatenspeicherung
netzpolitik.org/2025/csam-mini…
Digitale Dekade: EU-Kommission kritisiert schleppende Digitalisierung
netzpolitik.org/2025/digitale-…
Proteste in Serbien: Neue Untersuchung geht von Schall-Angriff auf Demonstration aus
netzpolitik.org/2025/proteste-…
Polizei und Gesichtserkennung: Damit müssen Menschen auf der Pride in Budapest rechnen
netzpolitik.org/2025/polizei-u…
Constitutional law professor Anthony Kreis: Trump wants ‘strategic chaos’ to dismantle institutions
netzpolitik.org/2025/constitut…
US-Verfassungsrechtler Anthony Kreis: Trump setzt auf „strategisches Chaos“
netzpolitik.org/2025/us-verfas…
Nach unserer Berichterstattung: Datenschutzbehörde findet Verstöße bei Berliner Werbefirma
netzpolitik.org/2025/nach-unse…
KW 24: Die Woche, als wir Aberwitziges über Gesichter-Suchmaschinen lernten
netzpolitik.org/2025/kw-24-die…
Angriffe auf Journalisten: Melonis Überwachungsskandal weitet sich aus
netzpolitik.org/2025/angriffe-…
Reflections from the 34th Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Side Event at UNOV
Last month PPI’s United Nations Office at Vienna main representative Kay Schroeder attended a side event co-hosted by Interpol and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime during the 34th Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice. The event focused on the use of neurotechnologies in criminal justice. PPI is closely monitoring these conversations out of our concern that overzealous institutions will use these technologies to infringe on civil liberties.
Neurotechnology includes everything from functional MRI scanners to brain stimulation devices. And the scary thing is that law enforcement have been adopting these technologies. While these capabilities promise new avenues for crime prevention, they also raise profound questions about privacy and social inequalities. The poor and weaker members of society are at risk, and we must defend them from being abused by these technologies. Unfortunately, many of the speakers at the event did not seem concerned about the negative consequences of unleashing these tools.
Several presenters cited pioneering studies that predict reoffending based on brain activity, showing that it is even more reliable than profiling demographic factors. We worry about the scientific rigor and transparency of these studies, as well as safeguards against discrimination. Neurodata should never be used to reinforce discrimination. A recurring theme was the tension between voluntary interventions and coercive mandates. Rather we believe funding should be allocated to community-led mental-health services, rather than cheap technological attempts to prevent crime.
Speakers touted next-generation wearable devices that can decode semantics from brain-wave patterns. This eerie technology brings to mind the Orwellian thought police. They suggested that within three years, such devices might achieve more than 95% accuracy in lie detection, surpassing polygraphs. Others on site raised immediate concerns about readings, whereby even a 5% error rate can unjustly convict or exonerate. Aside from this, the dystopian invasion of privacy cannot be ignored. What happens when a suspect refuses the test? Would such refusal be deemed noncooperation or proof of guilt? We recommend statutory prohibition on compulsory neural lie detection, judicial oversight, and defending the right to silence.
Several NGOs showcased pilot programs in which neurofeedback helped participants with PTSD, addiction, or impulse-control issues. Such programs that seek to help people might offer positive ways to use this technology. We can be optimistic about some uses of this technology, but we should be careful. We must require informed consent, future studies about long-term impacts before such technologies are implemented, and careful oversight about how these programs are funded. We worry about cases where prisoners and less developed countries will be used as guinea pigs.
A highlight of the side event was a panel on “Neurorights”. They proposed five core entitlements to counterbalance neurotech’s invasive potential: mental privacy, ensuring that personal identity is not reprogrammed to distort one’s sense of self, cognitive liberty, protection from bias, ensuring these technologies do not exacerbate socioeconomic divides.
We believe PPI should call for a ban on covert neural data collection. We also would emphasize that such a ban should be considered on using such technology, except for positive reasons that involve psychological treatments where the patients are fundamentally aware of their rights to participate or refuse treatment. Until rigorous long-term studies are conducted, we should consider banning this technology outright, as we have with chemical weapons and other atrocious tools. We also should be careful that informed consent is not coerced. If a prisoner’s early release hinges on compliance with a “neurorehabilitation” protocol, is consent truly voluntary? Side event speakers recounted cases where incarcerated individuals felt compelled to sign on for neurofeedback to avoid extended sentences.
The side event showed both the promise and the peril of integrating neurotechnology into criminal justice. We applaud technological developments. We do not want to say that we should limit technological development. This technology may have positive uses in psychology and other fields, which can dramatically improve the well-being of some individuals. However, in the context of crime prevention, the use of this technology is frightening. We risk eroding mental privacy, entrenching biases, and coercing vulnerable populations.
As a UN ECOSOC member NGO, we are committed to ensuring that our voice is heard at the UN on these issues.
If you would like to help PPI continue to send representatives to these meetings, please consider making a small donation to our organization or becoming a member. If you would like to be involved personally in the movement, by writing about these issues or attending events, please let us know.
pp-international.net/2025/06/c…
Neues Berliner Verfassungsschutzgesetz: Mehr Überwachung, weniger Kontrolle, erschwerte Auskünfte
netzpolitik.org/2025/neues-ber…
Brasilianisches Verfassungsgericht: Soziale Medien sollen für Postings von Nutzer:innen haften
netzpolitik.org/2025/brasilian…
Behörden schauen zu: KI-Suche für Gesichter breitet sich ungehindert aus
netzpolitik.org/2025/behoerden…
ICYMI: No Kings and Good Neighbors
This Saturday, June 14th, there will be nationwide “No Kings” protests, protesting the current administration and the overreach of federal powers.
In the United States of America, we have no kings.
While many Pirates have already expressed their desire to attend their local No Kings protest, which you could find here.
In addition to attending, representatives from the Arizona Pirate Party will be tabling at the No Kings protest at Reid Park in Tucson, AZ
Speaking of No Kings, check out the Illinois Pirate Party Captain’s speech from the 50501 “No Kings” protest from May 17th in Quincy, IL here.
Back on Pan-American Day weekend, members of the US Pirate Party held tabling events and passed out flyers promoting the need for the United States being a good neighbor. That flyer is now available on our website and is available to read, download and print here.
Vorratsdatenspeicherung: Keine Begründung für überlange Speicherfrist von drei Monaten
netzpolitik.org/2025/vorratsda…
Verfassungsschutzbericht: Alte Facebook-Linke statt junger TikTok-Nazis
netzpolitik.org/2025/verfassun…
Femizide: „Unverantwortlich, die Risikobewertung einem Algorithmus zu überlassen“
netzpolitik.org/2025/femizide-…
KW 23: Die Woche, in der Merz Statist in einem globalen Popcorn-Moment wurde
netzpolitik.org/2025/kw-23-die…
Telegram no sirve para comunicarte de forma anónima
Telegram da a algunas personas una falsa sensación de privacidad que no está en absoluto justificada. Esto ocurre principalmente por su publicidad engañosa: Telegram afirma ser de código abierto y estar cifrado de extremo a extremo. Incluso si estas afirmaciones engañosas fueran del todo ciertas, la popular aplicación de mensajería tiene otros problemas graves que comprometen tu privacidad.
Sin cifrado, privativo, centralizado: una pesadilla para la privacidad
Solo el código del cliente de Telegram es libre, pero ese código es inútil sin los programas y la infraestructura de código cerrado delback end. Esos componentes centrales son controlados por una única empresa, que puede ser fácilmente obligada a cumplir con requerimientos de las autoridades. En agosto de 2024, el jefe de Telegram fue arrestado por las autoridades francesas, que exigían información sobre los usuarios de la aplicación. Cedió, mostrando al mundo que tus conversaciones privadas, número de teléfono, dirección IP, fotos y demás no están a salvo.
La financiación de Telegram depende de suscripciones de pago y anuncios. ¿Quién puede asegurarte que en el futuro no ampliarán sus fuentes de ingresos ofreciéndote anuncios basados en las cosas que envías y recibes o entrenando a una IA?
¿Qué impide que empleados de Telegram, jáqueres o espías gubernamentales lean tus mensajes? Nada. Los mensajes en Telegram no están cifrados por defecto, así que los usuarios están expuestos. Claro, podrían iniciar un «chat secreto», pero esa función no está disponible ni en la versión web ni en la de escritorio, y seguramente levantaría sospechas por salirte del rebaño (la privacidad opcional no es lo mejor).
Te vigilarán
Olvídate de ser anónimo en Telegram. Antes de siquiera poder empezar a chatear debes proporcionar un número de teléfono,que puede ser fácilmente vinculado a tu identidad real. Como solución, podrías utilizar un teléfono desechable y usar Telegram en el ordenador. ¿Pero y si quieres utilizarlo en un móvil? Tendrías que tener suficientes conocimientos tecnológicos para instalar un sistema operativo para móviles respetuoso con la privacidad y evitar ser rastreado por redes de telefonía móvil.
Una manera de proteger tu identidad es pagar por una verificación remota por SMS con Monero(SMSpool ofrece ese servicio) y utilizar Telegram en un sistema operativo libre. Si temes que Telegram pueda pedirte la verificación de nuevo y quieres seguir usando la misma cuenta, puedes comprar o alquilar por largo tiempo un número de móvil que no esté relacionado con tu identidad.
En resumen, usar Telegram con privacidad o anonimato es excesivamente complicado, por lo que no es un programa recomendable para esos fines. Si alguien te invita a a usar Telegram para hablar de temas delicados, evita entrar en la boca del lobo. Proponle hacerlo en persona o utilizar una alternativa libre, decentralizada y anónima (como SimpleX, Delta Chato Briar).
PPI Fundraiser for IGF
Dear Friends of the Pirate Community,
PPI is heading again to the Internet Governance Forum (IGF), this time in Norway. The IGF is a UN event that brings together a large number of governments and non-profit organizations. PPI has attended the IGF for about 10 years now. As part of our effort to attend the event, we are conducting a fundraiser to collect up to 1500 euros to support our representatives. Donations can be made directly on our website or through the following crowdfunding campaign: fundrazr.com/b2Yiz8
PPI was accepted to organize a workshop entitled “Ethical Networking: Sustainability and Accountability” will be on June 23rd at 16:15 in Workshop Room 2, Hall C: intgovforum.org/en/content/igf…
We will also be presenting at a booth with the European Pirate Party.
We are attempting to fundraise some of the costs of our representatives who will be paying out of their own pocket to attend the event. Being in Norway this year, means that it will not be cheap. Any financial assistance would be greatly appreciated.
As a way to further motivate fundraising, we have also provided an incentive to include individual membership in PPI, which normally costs 10 euros, for those who provide at least a 15 euro donation.
The entire event is from June 23rd to 27th. Please review the IGF website as the date nears for information about participating online: intgovforum.org/en/content/igf…
All approved events can be seen here: intgovforum.org/en/content/igf…
Last year in Saudi Arabia we also organized a workshop on Autarchy, spearheaded by Alexander Isavnin: intgovforum.org/en/content/igf…
Two years ago we had a booth in Japan: pp-international.net/2023/10/i…
The year before that PPI had a booth in Poland: pp-international.net/2021/12/p…
At the moment PPI does not have any extra funding for this event. Every PPI representative is self-funded. By making a donation you will provide partial assistance for one of our representatives to attend.
pp-international.net/2025/06/i…
Fragen und Antworten: Das Sondervermögen, die Infrastruktur und die Digitalisierung
netzpolitik.org/2025/fragen-un…
Zensurheberrecht: Google schmeißt kritische Berichterstattung wegen Fake-Beschwerden aus der Suche
netzpolitik.org/2025/zensurheb…
Grundgesetzänderung für Digitalisierung: „Die Infrastruktur für föderale Lösungen soll einheitlich sein“
netzpolitik.org/2025/grundgese…
Alaa Abd el-Fattah: UN-Arbeitsgruppe erklärt Haft von ägyptischen Blogger für illegal
netzpolitik.org/2025/alaa-abd-…
Alaa Abd el-Fattah: UN-Arbeitsgruppe erklärt Haft von ägyptischem Blogger für illegal
netzpolitik.org/2025/alaa-abd-…
Digitale Souveränität: Wie das EU-Parlament Europa unabhängiger machen will
netzpolitik.org/2025/digitale-…
Justizministerkonferenz: Weniger Berichtspflichten beim Abhören und bei Staatstrojanern
netzpolitik.org/2025/justizmin…
