Multiple mistakes in fact, lol
Care to explain? Besides the accidental 5 of course.
Readit Newswwtrv commented on Brazil Supreme Court unfreezes X, Starlink's bank accounts after taking $3.3M thehill.com/policy/techno... · Posted by u/ivewonyoung
> secret gag orders
We can debate principles and even the legality of these actions. But they weren't done in secret. (EDIT: I may be mistaken in this claim.)
> Article 5 of the Brasil constitution guarantees a right to free speech without censorship
Would this also ban spam filters? Fraud convictions? If not then there are obviously caveats to when and how one can censor. (No right can be absolute. If it were, it would merit infinite sacrifice to uphold.)
Also, why isn’t Article 220 ¶ 5 the relevant one [1]? Article 5 has 74 sections. Genuine question, I have no knowledge of Brazilian law.
> taking money out of them - let’s call this what it is, theft
A court that can’t find people in contempt isn’t a court.
Again, we can debate the principles. But these are straw men.
[1] https://www.oas.org/es/sla/ddi/docs/acceso_informacion_base_...
You did include both of these in the same comment, though:
> Would this also ban spam filters? Fraud convictions? > But these are straw men
Anyway, at least in the US (but I also assume similar provisions in other countries as well) the 5th amendment generally only applies to the government, not companies and private individuals (in a way you deciding to "censor" someone is an expression of your free speech).
wwtrv commented on Google loses EU court battle over €2.4B antitrust fine politico.eu/article/googl... · Posted by u/JumpCrisscross
MPs are directly elected (you can literally vote for a single person in an EU election), they are not some kind of noblemen.
In reality they have a somewhat limited say in who the Commission president is going to back and almost no influence on its members. Compared to most national parliaments it's extremely weak and quite pointless.
It's pretty much a joke, it can't propose any legislation since it doesen't really control the "EU government". The could be a majority in the EU parliament that would support passing specific legislation and they couldn't do anything about that, not even have an actual vote.
Deleted Comment
wwtrv commented on Google loses EU court battle over €2.4B antitrust fine politico.eu/article/googl... · Posted by u/JumpCrisscross
No, I'm not referring to the speaker of the EU parliament, I am referring to the president of the European Commission, which is right now Ursula von der Leyen. She was appointed by the EU parliament and not democratically elected.
The EU leaders makes things as confusing as they are able to, in order to be able to do what they please without the population understanding much, but she (von der Leyen) is very much promoted as being a "real president", acts like a "real president" in foreign affairs. It is only when pointed out that they are not democratically elected that people start making excuses that the EU president is not a "real president".
Which way is it? I think the rulers of Europe want to have it both ways, so that they can smoothly direct their subjects as they please.
> She was appointed by the EU parliament
IMHO that would be perfectly fine on its own (or do you think that any parliamentary state is not a "real democracy"?).
But the problem is that she was appointed by the Council/National governments and the parliament just rubber-stamped their pick. If the relationship between the Parliament and Commission were the same as between the parliaments and governments of other countries it would be perfectly fine.
> "real president"
You clearly don't speak French? What's a "real president" anyway?
Also if we go that route you do know that the e.g. German, Italian, Greek etc. "presidents" are also not elected directly?
wwtrv commented on Google loses EU court battle over €2.4B antitrust fine politico.eu/article/googl... · Posted by u/JumpCrisscross
I think this may be a misunderstanding of the word "president". The role you're talking about is more like that of the Speaker of the House in the US or the UK. Both are elected by members of the chamber, not a popular vote.
https://the-president.europarl.europa.eu/en/the-presidency/f...
There is no "President" of the EU in the US sense of the word.
BTW parliaments were not democratically elected historically, that's true (eg women didn't get the vote until recently) but not relevant today.
> The role you're talking about is more like that of the Speaker of the House in the US or the UK. Both are elected by members of the chamber, not a popular vote.
Not really. The commission president is certainly (not even remotely) the equivalent of the Speaker in the British parliament (maybe a slightly closer in the US).
Not even Prime Minister would be a real equivalent since the commission isn't appointed by the parliament and it has relative very little say in what the commission does. In certain ways it's not fundamentally that different from some of the pseudo-democratic European states in the 1800s where the job of parliament was only to rubber stamp the laws written by the appointed government (of course there is no equivalent of the King/Emperor).
‘Truly bad’ still relies on the perspective of the participant though. Parents point is that ‘bad’ is a matter of perspective, and that right or wrong, at lease some cartel/nk/isis operatives believe their actions are justified for some greater good, Palestine/Israel opinions and belief are obviously a more easy to understand perspective, but the point still stands.
Really? Some cartel operatives believe their actions are justified for some greater good? Well unless you count filling your own pockets a "greater good" then they are objectively extremely deranged and delusional which possibly makes them even more dangerous.
> relies on the perspective of the participant though > Parents point is that ‘bad’ is a matter of perspective, and that right or wrong,
Not really, though. Some things are just 'bad' (you or the perpetrator might not agree but that doesen't change that fact).
wwtrv commented on Air Con: $1697 for an on/off switch blog.hopefullyuseful.com/... · Posted by u/ranebo
> I don't think actual malicious planned obsolescence is as prevalent as many believe.
I've been saying this for a while.
Consumers are insanely price-sensitive while also short-sighted. They'll buy a $20 blender that will die in a year rather than the $100 blender that will last a lifetime.
Manufacturers know this and there's a race to the bottom on pricing. To get pricing as low as possible, quality and durability take a hit.
> They'll buy a $20 blender that will die in a year rather than the $100 blender that will last a lifetime.
One problem for consumers is that often it's very hard to tell which is which. There is no guarantee that a $60 item won't just be overpriced garbage which is as bad (or worse if they spent much of that money on unnecessarily complex features that reduce reliability) as the $20 one, so always picking the cheaper item that superficially might seem good enough is not necessarily irrational.
(of course this doesen't necessarily apply to all brands yet)
wwtrv commented on Telegram founder Pavel Durov arrested at French airport theguardian.com/media/art... · Posted by u/NoxiousPluK
How do they "knowingly" service criminals ? Is there a check box to state that you are a criminal when you message someone ? I just installed Telegram and can't find it.
The idea is (well according to France at least) that they'll monitor those chats and report the suspected "criminals" to the government.
> Is there a check box to state that you are a criminal when you message someone
I assume they'd could check for specific keywords or use perceptual hashing for images etc.
wwtrv commented on Telegram founder Pavel Durov arrested at French airport theguardian.com/media/art... · Posted by u/NoxiousPluK
Most of officials in every democracy, purported or otherwise, are unelected. For practical reasons, you always elect a group, which then sets up or elects other groups, which together form the government.
And your point is? Generally only unelected officials are allowed to formulate or propose EU policy (the EU "parliament" is only there for rubber stamping it) how is that similar to most countries?