The Internet’s been ubiquitous for more than two decades now, and the people writing laws to regulate it in most democracies still lack even a high-level understanding about how it and the software they use to access it works. They also seem to go out of their way to avoid working with anyone who actually does know how to implement safety measures in less dangerous or exploitable ways. It’s inexcusable.
They ignore experts/scientists because they’re a liability when all you care about is personal financial gain and fulfilling the role your oligarch/corporate handlers bankrolled you to fulfil.
If browsers are forced to build this system to comply with French laws, it’s only a small step for other governments to leverage this new infrastructure and mandate bans on any website they don’t like.
this is like preventing your car from driving you to the bank so you cant rob it
This might actually happen someday. Imagine: self-driving cars are the norm, car ownership is a thing of the past, you just hail an automatic cab and pay per ride.
In such a scheme the car company will probably know who you are, and the government could supply a blocklist of convicted criminals to prevent them from using their services.
What kind of an idiot is going to rob a bank and hail a taxi cab for the getaway?
WTF?! „… force browser providers to create the means to mandatorily block websites present on a government provided list.“
Today it’s some terrorist / pedophile / fraudulent site, tomorrow it could be some opposition, news or whatever could be disliked site on that list.
whipped up a quick meme
They indicted 7 people for Terrorism last year because they encrypted their disks, used tail as their OS and signal for communication.
You’re saying France convicted people for terrorism purely because they used encryption? That’s a bold claim. What’s your source?
I’m not quite sure which case, I think it was about activists (not sure tho), but these fact were indeed used as an argument to support the idea that they were terrorists, because they’re trying to hide something
That’s a fucked up legal system…
The fact that you care about privacy means that you are hiding something which means that you are now a terrorist.
That sort of broken logic can apply to almost anything
Yep.
No, that wasn’t the “reason” like you want to make it sound by using because without any modifier like “also”.
How would adding “also” fit in my sentence. I tried but couldn’t.
“They indicted 7 people for Terrorism last year, in part because they encrypted their disks, used tail as their OS and signal for communication.” would work maybe.
“also because”?
English isn’t my native language but still it feels very off. Is it even correct ?
“Correct” as in an allowed use? Yes.
Aside this being extremely fucked up. Why do they even feel the need? I’ve been online most my life and have never been defrauded. Are there a shit ton of people in France getting scammed by stupid websites? Did they look at China and go, yes plz? Some authoritarian shit and extremely dangerous. Who’s going to be the fuck that decides which sites to block?
Why do they even feel the need?
Because the idea that the masses can freely disseminate information amongst themselves without needing the clergy or the state or “big media” to control it for them is like a splinter in the upper class’s minds.
People might go online and find out that it’s not normal to have your country burn down every few months. They mights start getting angry at the people in power.
Just kidding, this is probably about protecting corporate profits from the evils of BitTorrent or some shit.
Instead of guessing, you could just… Google it. It’s about making harmful content unavailable to minors. I’m all for Internet freedom, but something makes me uncomfortable about protesting against protecting children from porn. It’s probably something to do with me seeing porn when I was young and it fucking me up for a long time.
here’s the proposed bill btw https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/dossierlegislatif/JORFDOLE000047533100/
I knew those Fr*nch were up to something 😡
Our president. We’re for nothing ._. And yeah, he’s loved by no one
I don’t understand how he’s still the president with how y’all protest sometimes
Because cops are cracking skulls, gouging eyes and blowing hands when they aren’t straight up murdering someone who doesn’t comply with them.
He has the cops and doesn’t hesitate to use them
If nobody likes him, them why do people vote for him?
Only ~65% of French people have voted on the first round, and only 27.84% voted for him on the first round. So it’s not representaive of " people". And if your asking why so many people didn’t vote, it’s beacause the working class and the younger people are desperate and think that in any case the future president, whoever he is, will do nothing for them (which is kinda true).
Jesus France is really fucking over their people aren’t they?
They’ve had quite an authoritarian tendency since quite a while, with legislation about surveillance and encryption, plus the most violent police in Western Europe (possibly in all of Europe) which was purposefully made to be so through legislation granting them increasing amounts of immunity and legal cover to use ever more harmful equipment to “maintain public order”.
In parallel, quite a lot of ex-PMs of France have been convicted of Corruption.
I suspect these things are related.
I hate that these articles are always couched in excusatory language like, “While motivated by a legitimate concern…”
These people are not your friends, they’re your enemies. Don’t accept their frame in the argument.
Even if firefox complies, I am sure a fork will be made that will disable the in-browser censorship. That is the good thing about FOSS.
Meanwhile, Google’s DRM for the web be like:
There is Brave and forked chromium browsers, but yeah hahahahaha.
DO YOU HAVE A SLIP FROM DADDY MACRON ALLOWING YOU TO BYPASS THE CENSHORSHIP WE HAVE FORCED UPON YOU FOR YOUR PROTECTION?
Nope, but FOSS is ungovernable.
Yeah the government would never punish people for doing something the government doesn’t want then to do.
How would they enforce this on open source projects without companies behind them?
They can still go after GitHub and GitLab. Even if they self-host, they could go after their domain registrar.
Going after GitHub doesn’t seem viable given that they stood up for YouTube-dl
I guess from the perspective of lawmakers, it’s no different requiring browsers to not display certain sites than requiring book stores to not sell certain books.
I can even see the “logic” in that to a degree, especially if the people talking about it are rather tech averse.
Why should a book store not be allowed to sell certain books? Tf? There’s nothing we can’t find online if we wanted to. Why would anyone want allow some self righteous asshat to determine which books you can and can’t read. Dangerous shit.
So educate them?
What happened to parental responsibility?
