𝙲𝚑𝚊𝚒𝚛𝚖𝚊𝚗 𝙼𝚎𝚘𝚠

https://github.com/TheArchitectDev/Architect.Identities

Here’s the package one of our former developers created. It has some advantages and some drawbacks, but overall it’s been quite a treat to work with!

At the company I work at we use UUIDv7 but base63 encoded I believe. This gives you fairly short ids (16 chars iirc, it includes lowercase letters) that are also sortable.

Aaand here’s your misunderstanding.

All messages detected by whatever algorithm/AI the provider implemented are sent to the authorities. The proposal specifically says that even if there is some doubt, the messages should be sent. Family photo or CSAM? Send it. Is it a raunchy text to a partner or might one of them be underage? Not 100% sure? Send it. The proposal is very explicit in this.

Providers are additionally required to review a subset of the messages sent over, for tweaking w.r.t. false positives. They do not do a manual review as an additional check before the messages are sent to the authorities.

If I send a letter to someone, the law forbids anyone from opening the letter if they’re not the intended recipient. E2E encryption ensures the same for digital communication. It’s why I know that Zuckerberg can’t read my messages, and neither can the people from Signal (metadata analysis is a different thing of course). But with this chat control proposal, suddenly they, as well as the authorities, would be able to read a part of the messages. This is why it’s an unacceptable breach of privacy.

Thankfully this nonsensical proposal didn’t get a majority.

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=COM:2022:209:FIN

Here’s the text. There are no limits on which messages should be scanned anywhere in this text. Even worse: to address false positives, point 28 specifies that each provider should have human oversight to check if what the system finds is indeed CSAM/grooming. So it’s not only the authorities reading your messages, but Meta/Google/etc… as well.

You might be referring to when the EU can issue a detection order. This is not what is meant with the continued scanning of messages, which providers are always required to do, as outlined by the text. So either you are confused, or you’re a liar.

Cite directly from the text where it imposes limits on the automated scanning of messages. I’ll wait.

The point is is that it should never, under no circumstances monitor and eavesdrop private chats. It’s an unacceptable breach of privacy.

Also, please explain what “specific circumstances” you are referring to. The current proposal doesn’t limit the scanning of messages in any way whatsoever.

It does require invasive oversight. If I send a picture of my kid to my wife, I don’t want some AI algorithm to have a brainfart and instead upload the picture to Europol for strangers to see and to put me on some list I don’t belong.

People sharing CSAM are unlikely to use apps that force these scans anyway.

Not Criticsquid, but Citricsquid! I actually remember the guys name after all these years and immediately saw the spelling mistake. A testimony to how influential he ended up being.

Here’s my hot take: people aren’t switching to far right parties all that much. In a moderately healthy democracy, up to 30% of voters are often protest voters. They are unsatisfied with the current state of affairs and vote for whoever promises the largest upset of the status quo that they could see as potentially benefitting them.

Often the media then likes to massively overinflate their popularity, artificially enhancing their electoral success. But it’s also often short-lived. If you look at Dutch elections, you’ll find that a group of voters went for LPF, then PVV, then FvD and then PVV again. Each time it’s broadly talked about as the “rise of X party” but almost every time nothing truly materializes.

In the US you see a hardcore group of approx. 30% of voters vote for Trump religiously. Then there’s a smaller group of moderate Republicans that dislike the Democrats enough to end up voting for Trump too. They don’t like Trump but he’s “ok enough, and better than Obama/Clinton/Biden/Sanders etc…”.

In France, Le Pen got around 30% of the vote. She didn’t perform dissimilarly to the last presidential election results, it was more noticeable that the other parties got much smaller than they were. But whether or not Le Pen can actually take the crown remains to be seen.

Netherlands actually didn’t change much. PVV got +5, but FvD (a worse PVV) lost 4. And the VVD (where Wilders came from originally) also lost 1, so it kinda cancels out. Same goes for the left parties which went from 9 to 8, but that seat went to a progressive center party.

Overall very little has shifted here. And it seems at the European level the same coalition will continue too.

Well, the numbers show otherwise.

https://hackaday.com/2024/05/03/google-removes-risc-v-support-from-android/

The financial sector offers a magnitude more services than just “transactions”. It’s a stupid comparison.

XD is Dubai (separate from the United Arab Emirates).

Because the Kremlin would protect him and help him broadcast his message. It harms the US government, so the Kremlin sees providing Snowden with protection and a platform as an absolute win.

Most other countries that are remotely aligned with the US might be pressured to keep Snowden quiet.

Music locker services are frequenly targeted and taken down, as GlitterInfection mentioned. There’s multiple cases on the Wikipedia page.

There is a jump between hosting and sharing, but that jump is very small. Share it with 1 other person, and you have made unauthorised copies of the licensed material, and are therefore acting against the law. That’s not FUD, that’s been reality for the past few decades.

Whether or not the illegal sharing of licensed material is done via a generic website, a federated service of even carrier pidgeon doesn’t matter, an unlicensed copy is an illegal copy. Rightsholders have pleny of avenues to force a takedown against specific instances. And if they can successfully argue that the primary purpose of this software is piracy, they may even have enough legal arguments to force a takedown of the sourcecode.

Of course, the main question is whether rightsholders will bother with this as long as it remains small-scale. Legal costs would likely outweigh the missed income. But that doesn’t actually shield you from legal liability.

They would be able to sue the webhost in order to retrieve basically all the data if they have strong and reasonable suspicions that the website is hosting copyrighted material.

This really isn’t as foolproof in legal terms unfortunately. With torrent websites there’s still some ambiguity as the website doesn’t host the copyrighted material, just the torrent files. But here the website itself is liable, painting a massive legal target on their backs.

ISPs can be compelled to share name/address information of anyone involved in publishing licensed material through the courts. Then they’ll summon you to stop or pay a fairly hefty fine.

At least in the Netherlands this would still constitute unauthorised copying of licensed material, and therefore be illegal.

I tried this but can’t reproduce your results. AdGuard doesn’t seem to be sending any weird DNS or tracking requests on my phone.

I’m fairly certain you’re seeing some kind of false positive, but I don’t quite know what’s going on exactly.

It’s additional space around components showing what’s behind it. So you’re seeing more stuff in between windows, making it look less organised imo. The “whitespace” isn’t really white here. It looks like another unnecessary element crammed inbetween two windows that might as well just sit neatly next to one another, making the windows slightly larger. I also like being able to move my mouse to the edge of things (e.g. the taskbar) without ending up in the whitespace, which causes misclicks for me.

Again, my opinion. Not stating absolute truths here.