• Gsus4@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    57 minutes ago

    Oh look, the tech companies sent a shit eating emissary to tell us how to live our lives so as to exploit us better…

  • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    11 hours ago

    … which Washington says stifles free speech

    No that’s not it. Washington couldn’t care kess

    and imposes costs on U.S. tech companies,

    Ding ding ding!

  • ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    14 hours ago

    There is a polish movie called “Debt”. It’s about a guy who unknowingly does some business with a gangster and ends up owning him some money. Throughout the movie he gives the gangster more and more money but the fictional debt only keeps growing.

    This is exactly what happened here. EU folded on the trade deal so now US wants more. It was clear to anyone with a little bit of sense that agreeing to 15% tariffs will not stabilize the situation. EU is run by idiots.

    • BakerBagel@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Yeah, thry are neoliberals interested in maintaining the neoliberal world order that has existed for the past 50 years.

      • Lumidaub@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        15 hours ago

        Thank you for this bit of wisdom. Why did you feel the need to share it here?

          • Lumidaub@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            29
            ·
            15 hours ago

            You do with your laws whatever the fuck you want. We have different approaches to things and if US based companies don’t like that, they’ll have to find somewhere else to sell their stuff instead of relying on your government to help them bully other countries. Capitalism, small government, and all that.

          • REDACTED@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            19
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            14 hours ago

            Oh no. Imagine seeing pro-Trump ad, but the “paid by” reads “Vladimir Putin”. I mean, I get why Trump does not like transparency, but this law isn’t all that bad, includes stuff like having basic fundamental rights in ToS and being able to contact the company.

            Good for people, bad for authoritarians and corporations.

          • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            12 hours ago

            Can you explain why they are stupid? Please remember to take the boot from your mouth before you begin.

  • Optional@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    13 hours ago

    What a disgusting pigfucking punk this piece of shit turned out to be. When he was a Senator he was “just” awful. Goddamn I hope The Fates have something cooking up for him.

  • NebLem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Lazy question as I haven’t followed the DSA closely and Wikipedia seems very surface level - does it do stupid privacy invasive crap and forget small sites exist like the UK’s Online Safety Act?

    • Anafabula@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      10 hours ago

      The Wikipedia page doesn’t sound too bad, but IANAL.
      The regulation linked from the wiki article only includes the word “age” three times and actually states:

      […] this prohibition should not lead the provider of the online platform to maintain, acquire or process more personal data than it already has in order to assess if the recipient of the service is a minor. Thus, this obligation should not incentivize providers of online platforms to collect the age of the recipient of the service prior to their use.

      Haven’t looked at it any more than that, but it sounds like it’s already been in effect for ~2 years?

    • roude@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      12 hours ago

      I haven’t reviewed the whole thing, only small parts but it does look to handle online verification better (re: invasiveness).

      There is a section talking about a prototype app already released that is used to store age. It verifies off a couple different government docs (ID, bank details, upcoming Digital ID), but in the end only stores the user’s age (no name, ID, birth date, or other details). The fact page for the app claims that once age is established there is no further contact between the user and age verifier, but of course this is where I likely see the issue with any age verification tool. It’ll depend on whether the verification tool trashes age-related data once done with it, or if they retain a copy for whatever reasons.

      Proof of age is tied to the age required per country per activity, but this sounds far more reasonable than having a single company verify and manage age data (Persona in the US).

      • dubyakay@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        8 hours ago

        prototype app

        Ahh yes, the app that coincidentally locks mobile OSes into the google ecosystem. 🤮

        • roude@lemmynsfw.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          7 hours ago

          It is a prototype.

          Their development roadmap specifically mentions Android AND iOS versions…

          • dubyakay@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            6 hours ago

            Yes. But it excludes any sort of custom OS versions due to the way it’s implemented. So no Lineage, no Graphene.

  • BigDiction@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    12 hours ago

    I’m ignoring the US politics for a moment…

    If I flag a comment on Lemmy for abuse, breaking community rules, or other reasons, do you y’all think I am individually owed a response from the mod team on whether the content stays approved, or was removed, that includes the specific criteria behind the decision?

    That’s what the DSA requires among many other requirements.

    • Technopagan@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 hours ago

      IANAL but the DSA says nothing about requirements to inform reporters on a community moderation level. It is only concerned with illegal content and this cannot be simply flagged. It has to be a sufficiently substantiated explanation reported to the instance legal contact.

      • BigDiction@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Also NAL and different sizes of platforms have different obligations. Could be wrong that the scenario I described applies to Lemmy.

  • bigmamoth@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    12 hours ago

    What tech ? We have ASML and it s great but other than that in what tech are we leader ? We had nuclear turbine before but macron sold them and I can t find any other one