Basing your opinions on socialism on how Russia implemented it makes about as much sense as basing an opinion on Democracy on how Putin has implemented it.
Communism, like capitalism, is an extreme that has certain, very difficult to achieve, requirements. Capitalism needs everyone to be morally decent in order for companies to focus on winning customers through innovation instead of propganda and lobbying, and to accept losses instead of whining. Even the transition into communism is incredibly complicated and technically what where the USSR was stuck, and once there you have to hope that the rest of the world went along with it because it’ll work either on increbily small scales(individual companies, for example) or on a global scale but not really on a mid-sized scale. Plus in both you have basic greed and people who are literally just born narcissitic or legitimately psychotic.
Extreme ideologies are great thought experiments but rarely have any kind of well-developed protections built and are pretty fragile.
If you want a better answer, look at the quality of life in countries with stronger regulations and more communism-according-to-North America systems. In the heavily privatised U.S. there are a lot of people who live absolutely shit lives due to an abyssmal lack of protections. Even in Canada, which is far too close to the U.S. here, at least a homeless person can recieve some level of medical assistance including major surgeries and Covid stimulus was more than a cheap joke.
That’s a cute meme, but not true at all. Canada spends a lot of money on health care for the homeless. In fact, the current system of NOT spending enough on basic shelter and mental health & addiction supports means that we spend far more than we should on emergency care and downstream health-related consequences.
There is widespread agreement among those who work in social services that some form of supervised, humane institutional living is needed if we are going to solve the homelessness problem. There is hesitation to implement that because it is extremely expensive and politically fraught.
More importantly, if we are being honest, housing people in decent conditions for free would create a huge amount of competition with private sector landlords, retirement homes, long-term care homes, etc. Unfortunately, the “system” implicitly uses the threat of homelessness or squalid accommodations as a major lever to motivate people to work at jobs that are not very stimulating. Mind you, human nature being what it is, I think the same would ultimately be true under any economic system or form of government.
At least until our robotic AI overlords invent an unlimited energy source and take over the tedious work so we can all sit around doing whatever pleases us, lol.
Cuba, Vietnam, Allende’s Chile perhaps, but it’s not like any are perfect. There’s a wide range of socialist approaches used in different countries around the world though.
Moderate socialist governments effectively weren’t allowed to exist, the US sponsored fascist coups and did whatever they could to remove them. So the ones that were able to survive had to be more extreme, autocratic, and isolationist.
How the USSR implemented socialism was pretty great in practice, the real history of it has just been hidden from you behind the thick fog of cold-war anticommunist propaganda.
Just 2 centuries around here having inquisition in place made sure no other alternatives exist nowadays. Genocide is effective kids. Learn from History.
There’s a ton missing. The point still stands, but the bottom map is more like “places that are 70%+” indigenous people, rather than a comprehensive list. Is mislabeled to make a point, which is a stupid thing to do.
Go is like snakes: you’re hatched from an egg and pretty much effective from the get-go. The older you get, the bigger prey you can eat, but otherwise things don’t change much since you were hatched. Your species can thrive in almost any environment, you’re effective, you have all the tools you need straight out of the egg.
Rust is like humans. There’s a huge incubation period, and you’re mostly helpless when you’re born, but the older you get, the more effective you become with the tools nature graced you with. And you, like Thanos, are inevitable, even if it does mean the death of billions.
Python is like beaver. Everyone has an opinion about you: some think you’re cute, some think you’re wierd. You’re perfectly suited to your environment, but things get awkward outside of your natural habitat - you can function, but not as well as when you’re in your comfort zone. And when people encounter you where they’re not expecting, they can be unpeasantly surprised, and you can cause them trouble.
C++ is like platypus. You resemble some other more simple, some might say sane, animal, but developed into a sort of frankenstein monster creature made from a jumble of parts and a stinger that, when it kills someone, comes as a shock. Every part of you serves some purpose, even if it seems tacked-on and out of place.
Then there’s Node. You are everywhere. You are legion. You fill up ecosystems. People try to defend you, claiming that you serve some purpose in the foodchain, but there’s scant evidence. Attempts to eradicate you fail. You often spread deadly disease. You breed, rapidly, persistently, relentlessly. You are widely hated, and yet everwhere.
Perl is a honey bee. You are unassuming and pragmatic. You fill every niche. Your buzzing carries meaning, but only to other bees. In theory, your ecosystem niche is filled by many competing solutions that are more fit to purpose. But somehow we all know in our hearts that if you disappear, all life on the planet will probably die soon after.
May I acquaint you with the Evil Mangler, historically used by GHC to compile Haskell via C. It would go through the assembly gcc generates and rearrange whole blocks and deletes instructions, such as function prologues and epilogues.
There is a very strange, and maybe unexpected, cultural overlap between Perl and Haskell: It’s definitely possible to produce write-only Haskell, and once you get good enough writing Haskell it becomes very inviting to do so. It’s generally going to be a tiny bit more robust, probably a bit slower, and do dirty things with syb regexen could never dream of. While Perl will rip a DFA through a html file while hoping for the best, Haskell will respect the tree structure and then bend it into eldritch knots, leaving you with a file that’s like 50 lines of parser combinators (“it works on my files”) and then five lines of completely inscrutable magic doing the actual processing.
So then I guess C is salamander. Also lays eggs and lives by a pool, but doesn’t do anything extra, and is a necessary step before most of the other modern languages.
COBOL is a coelacanth. To everyone’s surprise, they’re still out there. We thought they were an old, very extinct example of a non-terrestrial lobe-finned fish, but they actually hung on in some odd environments. They cause massive indigestion to anyone that has to consume them.
If Node is a mosquito, Javascript itself is another hymenopteran: the yellow jacket wasp. Just as hated, and with a tendency to injure handlers, but widely successful and defended as filling an actual useful role in nature. They build delicate, arguably pretty nests.
I recall writing a script that produces that 01237 with smaller digits around it for the current date. It lists the numbers that occur in the date (0, 2, 3 and 9 for 2023-09-09), the smaller digits show at which position they show up in a YYYYMMDD format (the 0 shows up on positions 2, 5 and 7)
The script has not been pushed online cause it was so dang bad
There's a big difference between being against Israel and being antisemitic, and people need to see that. Heck, I'm literally Jewish and I don't support Israel.
And, as I’ve heard someone else point out - isn’t it literally anti-Semitic to assume that Jews and Israelis are, like, the same thing? And/or that Israel is, like, the global mouthpiece for Jews everywhere? Seems a bit reductive, to me… Seems on the same level as thinking the leader of Kenya, or Nigeria, or any African nation speaks for Black people everywhere.
I’ve always felt the nation of Israel is squatting on the name. Like, aren’t there people outside of Israel-the-nation that also claim to be Israel (in the Biblical sense)?
Rubenberg 1989, p. 358: “The labeling of individuals who disagree with the lobby’s positions as “anti-Semitic” is a common practice among Israel’s advocates. For example, when Senator Charles Mathias [R., Maryland] voted in favor of the AWACs sale to Saudi Arabia, a Jewish newspaper in New York commented: “Mr. Mathias values the importance of oil over the well-being of Jews and the State of Israel. The Jewish people cannot be fooled by such a person, no matter what he said, because his act proved who he was.” Former Congressman Paul “Pete” McCloskey [R., California] also has had the charge of anti-Semitism leveled at him: “When I ran for reelection in 1980, I was asked a question about peace in the Middle East, and I said if we were going to have peace in the Middle East we members of Congress were going to have to stand up to our Jewish constituents and respectfully disagree with them on Israel. Well, the next day the Anti-Defamation League of the B’nai B’rith accused me of fomenting anti-Semitism, saying that my remarks were patently anti-Semitic.” Indeed, it may be that the weapon of greatest power possessed by the pro-Israeli lobby is its accusation of anti-Semitism. George Ball comments: “They’ve got one great thing going for them. Most people are terribly concerned not to be accused of being anti-Semitic, and the lobby so often equates criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism. They keep pounding away at that theme, and people are deterred from speaking out.” In Ball’s view, many Americans feel a “sense of guilt” over the Holocaust, and the result of their guilt is that the fear of being called anti-Semitic is “much more effective in silencing candidates and public officials than threats about campaign money or votes.””
I am “against” religion as I think it does more harm than good but I am pro religious freedom for everyone and a peaceful cooperative global society. So I think that makes me hardly hateful towards religions or the believers. Well tbh I have a hard time accepting religious extremist positions in societies, but everything comes with a price… I take religious freedom for everyone if that means someone thinks a book with instructions on how to abort a baby is against abortion and that it should be law.
Most extremists are worrisome. Some cause more trouble for those around them than others, though. An extreme pacifist might get more abuse than someone who isn’t, for instance, and that isn’t great, but it’s a more personal problem than trying to force your views and behaviors on others, which many other types of extremists try to do.
An extreme pacifist might get more abuse than someone who isn’t, for instance
Don’t know whether I’d qualify as extreme, but yeah, pacifism tends to be equated with all sorts of deliberate harm by some people who consider things like war and violent retribution necessary evils if not even inherently good 😮💨
Also, there’s the “sticking to your principles in spite of popular sentiment is the same as naïveté” crowd 🤦
I’m against the Israeli government’s murder of children and murder of all the other innocent people in Palestine.
Should I be against Israel itself?
Note I’m [US] American, so I’m against the incalculable harms we’ve perpetrated on the world and our own citizens over the past couple hundred years. I would hesitate - pending some replies to me here - to say “I don’t support the USA” given the very cool people and the Bernie Sanders types and the benevolent US aid organizations and the National Parks and so on (some fediverse developers)… but have an open mind and curious to hear your thoughts on semantics.
At this point, when someone says they are ‘against Israel’, what they mean is that they are against the genocide the Israeli army is carrying out in Gaza. Maybe there are some who want the country itself toppled - neo-Nazis, for example, or those detached from reality - but they are a small minority (outside of Iran, perhaps).
Europe uses the word socialism differently. It’s a difference in how the words are used and the time they are used. If we consider socialism shared responsibility, we have it America in many ways but we are hesitant to expand it. That’s because of our fear of large government power.
If we me socialism as the workers owning the means of production. Well no country does that. Normally it’s the government owning everything and the workers being abused such as the Soviet Union or Cuba. That’s the large governments Americans dislike.
Yeah, socialism isn’t taxing the rich, it is or at least have always led to brutal dictatorships because the real one is just communism with extra steps.
Social-democracy on the other hand is wonder for the people (see Sweden etc) in real life.
I’m a conservative and read a wonderful article on why conservatives should be leading the charge to a social democracy like Sweden. It really changed my views on why we should be skippering certain endeavors. Just neither party here has really embraced the basic concept.
An example was national health care allowed people to be more entrepreneurial since that is a large risk to not have insurance here.
Yeah y’all really don’t want to end up like us. We’re not the land of the free. The streets are most definitely not paved with gold. We’re just a giant ponzi scheme.
It’s actually insane how many of our institutions are actually based on pyramid schemes. No wonder we all use it as the symbol for conspiracy because it is a huge portion of how anything runs in the US. Cover the costs by convincing more people to join in at a less beneficial or profitable step down the pyramid and hope someone else will be coming behind you for you to take from as well.
No kidding. Their “fix” every year is to either fill all the potholes with asphalt, which the spring rains promptly loosen and get kicked out, or a thin “repaving” layer, which gets destroyed by the summer monsoons. I’m convinced Caltrans is a jobs program for people that can’t get a job otherwise, because those guys can’t seem to get anything done correctly.
Start a social media account for pics of the pothole. Keep tagging city officials in it. Call or email someone every time you’re reminded that the pothole exists so they will be too. Make the city rue the day they gave Cave Johnson lem… Potholes.
Yep. We should have told the colonies of Georgia and Carolina to fuck off, and we’ll get around to conquering them, after we kicked The King out of the other 11 colonies.
If one person had voted differently during The Continental Congress, we would have started abolishing slavery
There are elements of capitalism there, but I wouldn’t call it a capitalist economy. Capitalism requires that private individuals own the means of production. But, in Russia does anybody outside Putin’s inner circle really own anything?
Yes, absolutely. The Russian Federation is the direct result of a collapsing Socialist system in the hands of Capitalists, just because fewer and fewer people own things doesn’t mean it isn’t a direct result of Capitalization of the economy.
The USSR wasn’t really socialist at its core, and the new Russia really isn’t capitalist at its core.
In the former system, the theory was that the people / workers owned the means of production. The reality was that it was the leader and those close to him who really “owned” them in the sense that they had power over them. It was all about who you knew in that system. In a true socialist system, it should have been up to the people to make decisions, but in the USSR it was up to the party’s elites, and the people just had to live with it.
In the current system, it’s Putin and his close circle who own everything. While they allow capitalist type activities to happen, the capitalists don’t really own anything. If they displease Putin anything they have can be taken away on a whim. If you stay on Putin’s good side, or at least stay beneath his notice, you can operate as a capitalist. But, become too successful and you’ll be reminded who’s in charge.
Both true socialism and true capitalism require that the rule of law apply to everyone, even the leaders. If the leader can just ignore the laws and seize the “means of production” without facing consequences, it’s authoritarianism, not capitalism or communism / socialism.
The USSR was a flawed form of Socialism, but was fundamentally Socialist. The majority of the economy was run by Worker Soviets, in a process called Soviet Democracy. The Politburo, ie the highest Soviet, had a massive amount of influence and power, but day to day decisions were made locally. I would agree, I don’t think it was a particularly good form of Socialism, but I would still consider it Socialist.
Modern Russia is absolutely Capitalist at its core, that’s the entire foundation of the Russian Federation. The Capitalists are the Oligarchs! The Inner Circle are Capitalists! just because it’s a higher stage of Capitalism doesn’t mean it ceases to be Capitalism.
The USSR was a flawed form of Socialism, but was fundamentally Socialist
Was the rule of law strong enough that decisions were being made by the people, or were they being made by authoritarians? Because if key decisions weren’t being made by the people, it wasn’t socialist.
Capitalists can do that as well, without being feudalists. You’re tying an ancient peasant-aristocrat structure to modern Capitalism just to avoid acknowledging that Capitalism has failed Russia.
It has everything to do with Capitalism. When the USSR collapsed and the Russian Federation came into place, Capitalists got much of the Capital, and are now the “oligarchs.”
Well, French president and several of its ministers are saying that socialist left, or radical left, is extremist. So no, it’s not an America problem. It’s very much a Europe problem too.
Seriously, a lot of CEOs and most managers could be much more easily replaced by AI than the workers. Run some analysis on some metrics lay off people based on that. Go over the market analytics, direct staff to work on derivative versions of the products that have good numbers, cancel products that don’t. I’m not even sure if you really need AI for this, a very basic script could handle a lot of it.
Of course a program would be lacking in the common sense to say “Nobody is going to drop a week’s pay so they can go into a virtual world where they’re a poorly drawn legless cartoon character”. But present day CEOs make these mistakes anyway. It wouldn’t be good, but it wouldn’t be worse than the status quo.
it looks like the only comments of yours that were removed were for making inflammatory comments about homeless people on public transport in a place you don’t live.
Post your credit card number and DLN while you’re at it.
So a mod didn’t like a comment you made which was interpreted as encouraging anti-homeless hate. Instead of just moving on you decided to make this about “tankies” despite no one saying anything about Marxist ideology, China, or anything related. I think you’re just looking to pick a fight with us because we’re dirty pinko commies or something.
I love that y’all use that as an insult. It only carries any weight in your own echo chamber, you know that right? No where else on the planet (be it a forum or a physical space) does that mean anything. Well, maybe within north korea
Lol yeah they’re thinking about the coming winter, or the reality that they aren’t even allowed to leave their country (for all but the most privileged) unfortunately
[…] the Security Council today further tightened sanctions on the country, severely restricting fuel imports and other trade, as well as the ability of its citizens to work abroad.
Also acquired in the context of preventing the world superpower from killing 20 percent of them again without them having to spend so much on their conventional military.
Quick, tell me about the taean work system, which is used in all medium and large workplaces, without googling it. Since you’re so informed about the dprk
(The point of this is to make you reconsider how much you actually know about the country that isnt just straight up propaganda)
I’ll meet you: without googling I believe that is a work transfer system with China. I think it’s rail based, and I think they stay for some time.
But they aren’t free to go where they please, or leave the region entirely without ramifications.
Edit cause I was honest: I was wrong.
But are you purporting this agricultural system as effective?
Further I assume you bring that no fact up as argument that collectivist style policy is effective and happening, I would argue it is ineffective and still only a farce under authoritarianism. Else why would nk receive aid, and experience famine?
Lastly, I don’t need to know the economic history of the country to know where they are now. It’s not propaganda that got me here, it’s their own words and reports.
But are you purporting this agricultural system as effective?
It isnt their agricultural system, I would suggest you reread the whole thing because you’ve missed the most important aspect of what taean means. It means a collaboration between organized local labor and wider democracy, overseen by special interests such as the woman’s league.
Further I assume you bring that no fact up as argument that collectivist style policy is effective and happening, I would argue it is ineffective and still only a farce under authoritarianism. Else why would nk receive aid, and experience famine?
Why would you argue it is ineffective? Studies show the cooperatives work better than privately owned businesses. Also you haven’t established that the dprk is “authoritarian” any more than any other state.
They experienced famine after the collapse of the USSR, theyre doing fine on food now.
Lastly, I don’t need to know the economic history of the country to know where they are now. It’s not propaganda that got me here, it’s their own words and reports.
Well, you should. They tried to liberate the south when the US and US puppet dictator were killing tens of thousands of protestors. 20 percent of them died and all their infrastructure was bombed. After the war they did better under a socialist economy than the South until the US massively subsidized the South and the USSR collapsed, cutting off trade because of sanctions from the people who committed genocide on them (the US)
I would like to know what “own words and reports” you’re referring to.
It’s not propaganda that got me here, it’s their own words and reports.
This is an unusual claim, as most people do not let the DPRK speak for itself, even to then refute it. All you see is third hand horseshit along with defector “testimony”.
They are not the same, but it is America sanctioning both of them, and despite your worthless disavowed, your claim still rests on the tacit assumption that it is fairly arbitrating which civilian population deserves to suffer for decades.
Very few people fleeing the country do it via the dmz. They go through China (and get on a boat) because it’s actually pretty easy for them to go to China. Trying to cross the DMZ is liable to get them shot at by troops on both sides because you really aren’t supposed to cross without authorization, including southerners going north.
If “on the planet” you mean primarily the U.S and secondarily the rest of the “west” while excluding the majority of humanity on the planet, then sure.
You’re so brainwashed and conditioned into believing you have more in common with some ghoul billionaire that values your life insofar as much as they can extract wealth out of you than your own fellow worker.
I mean everywhere that isn’t China or Russia or one of their satellites/annexes yeah.
Not sure where you got the billionaire thing, I’ve never defended them, in word or action. (Living in a capitalist country and needing a job for resources doesn’t make me a billionaire apologist)
Liberalism and billionaire worship are not the same thing, same as communism and xi are not the same thing.
To be clear: just because xi figuratively leads a communist country doesn’t mean this policy is perfectly communist.
Same thing goes for billionaires existing in a liberal society.
Lastly, the existence of either doesn’t invalidate the tenets of either ideology
Xi is no different than any other billionaire shit head most of the communist party top leaders use there position to gain control over the state controlled businesses
This is incoherent. Xi has administrative control (or influence) over state enterprises, but he isn’t getting profits or stock options from them, so there are no grounds for calling him a billionaire
communist party top leaders use there position to gain control over the state controlled businesses
This is like saying you became a police commissioner to gain control over local police cars. Yeah, an explicit part of your job is that you can direct them, but the claim is so tautological that it looks like you are saying something else. It’s not like Xi will retain control of these enterprises after he leaves office.
Xi first started geting so much hate from the west because he actually started purging communist party members for being too involved in the private sector. If he was encouraging the bourgeoisification of the CPC he would be hailed by the west.
Obligatory comment that brainwashing is a myth rooted in orientalism and later pseudoscience, propagated by the US in order to make excuses for US soldiers defecting during the Korean War (et al).
A handle does not imply gender, I’ve been around since early IRC and it’s never been true.
I referred to you as “y’all” when I replied directly. When I replied later I didn’t even look at your name again, or remember who you were. I replied to “shimmering koi”. Is that a fish person? Obviously not.
I fucking hate tankies but I have zero issue with any gender, pronoun, sexuality, race, ethnicity, etc. If I ever had to talk to you again, I’d be fine to refer to you as whatever you want. But I wouldn’t remember you because this is a anonymous social media platform and identify is meaningless.
I am pretty sure “classist” is seen as a valid insult even among radlibs, and many other people believe in equivalent terms (“elitist” is not too far off)
That’s even sillier, since American parlance is definitely not universal and in most countries the colloquial meaning of “liberal” is essentially that of a market-loving centrist
You say “again,” but that’s a radically different claim from “this is an insult nowhere in the real world”. Even in neoliberal states it’s often an insult!
I don’t know what you millenial z’s or something keep complaining about - just buy a detached single family house with a backyard in the city for 125k and pay up your 1% interest rate mortgage within 10 years while your wife keeps it clean and drinks herself to death while resenting you daily, like any civilized 30 year old with a job for life and guaranteed payout pension does!
Man. Every time I see it again spelled out, how smooth these disingenuous decrepit assholes had it when they were my age, I start wishing for a claymore and a stump.
Landlords out here in lemmy dot marxist lenninists comments deadass pretending their right to steal wealth is more important than ones fundamental human right to housing.
Let this be your reminder that “Landlords” do nothing of value. Anytime they claim they are, they are doing the work of an occupation that possibly does, like an electrician or developer or architect or carpenter or handyman or painter or realtor. Ticket scalpers don’t create tickets. Don’t let these antisocial freaks rewrite the dictionary, or excuse their own refusal to read anything about their own behavior.
If they try to cosplay as a pitiable person who only owns a house and doesn’t want to be broke, tell them that their victims don’t want that either, and only the landlord hates working for a living more than they hate parasitizing the wealth others. Their “ethical and reasonable” rent seeking is enabled by the threat of violence from the other “unreasonable” rent seekers, therefore acting as a single unified class.
They could have sold their houses to profit, but that’s not enough for them. They must do their part to squeeze every drop of blood from that soil so that they don’t accidentally decomodify housing even slightly by providing their smidge of housing to the captive market.
Verification doesnt help at all if the source is not trusted. All this says is “upstream developers maintain this package”. Unofficial packages can be safe too, like VLC.
It does help prevent actual malware from being downloaded, though, since upstream developers probably won’t publish malware on Flathub.
But this is still a half-measure. I don’t understand why Red Hat and Canonical don’t treat this issue seriously; people on Linux are used to assuming software installed from the repos are safe, and yet Snap and Flatpak are being pushed more and more despite their main repositories being potentially unsafe.
I can’t find it now, but I read that the verification process also includes human review (for the initial verification, not every update), so it should actually prevent “verified” malware (though it does nothing against unverified malware).
This unverified badge does not prevent from malware being downloaded. This is a false statement! An upstream developer can have malicious intention and be verified as the upstream developer. This unverified badge only helps identifying its not a modified version by someone else and is guaranteed to be from the original developer. It does not prevent anyone from downloading and installing unverified apps. If that was the goal, then why having unverified apps in the first place on the store? Yes, because its useful. Therefore people will download unverified apps or just blindly trust verified apps.
At the moment his is enough. But if the Flathub store grows, this can be an issue. Look at the Android and ios app stores; there are plenty of apps from original developers with malicious intentions.
It is reasonable to assume that a verified Flatpak will have a lower chance of containing malware, since initial verification includes manual review (by a Flathub maintainer), and certain changes (like default permissions) also require manual review.
So the way I see it, it does help, but not in a meaningful way.
Because both Red Hat and Canonical are of the “pay us to care” mindset. If you aren’t paying for support, you’re a freeloader and need to do your own research.
That’s not entirely true with Red Hat. There’s a lot of work that they’ve done in the open source community that they haven’t shared back. And canonical seems to think this is a good idea.
Next step, display the “potential unsafe”-badge next to verified or unverified, that can be found on the same page. In example flathub.org/apps/io.github.shiiion.primehack is marked as verified, but if you scroll down you can see the application has full system and data access and is marked as potential unsafe.
It makes it obvious to people whether they are downloading Google Chrome as packaged by Google or as by someone else. That being said, Google Chrome is malware. That being said there is a lot more that needs to be done to truly prevent malware, which will be costly but will hopefully take effect when they’ve got the budget for it
Because if you search Firefox and see a badge that says verified, you can be confident that it was Mozilla that packaged it and added it to FlatHub as opposed to some random scammer.
This is the same grouping fallacy as the vaccine arguments. A lot of these people have trouble understanding nuance. The vaccine can be harmful to some and beneficial to others, it’s on a scale and it’s impossible to know who falls where on the scale. That doesn’t mean overall it’s a bad thing to do.
For op’s example there are some leftists who are lazy and weak, there are also some who are ruthless and there are some that are ruling class elites. The problem is when their groups are applied to the whole to suit whatever narrative they want it becomes nonsensical and dangerous.
I sure hope the courts toss that thing. It would be the single worst violation of peoples privacy since the internet became a thing. It's incredible that lobbyists and police unions have this much impact on policy creation.
Poor Axel Voss showed everyone how much of a media company whore he is just to get his biggest lifetime achievement taken down by the EU court because those filters could result in censorship (something that literally everybody told the supporters would happen)
The courts very likely will strike something like this down, but the people responsible know this. Court dealings can take years and during this time our privacy gets violated and some kind of profit is made.
And even when this law is declared illegal the existing data will likely be kept, only new collection is stopped (happened in Germany)
lemmy.ml
Top