Olives @olives@qoto.org

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/07/victory-embedded-links-photos-instagram-dont-infringe-photographers-copyrights Ninth Circuit rules that images embedded from somewhere else do not constitute copyright infringement.

The Woodhull Freedom Foundation primarily deals in issues relating to sexual freedom and sexual expression.

They're friends with that other foundation, the EFF.

They appear to have Article 19 confused with the First Amendment there, although I get that they serve similar goals.

https://www.woodhullfoundation.org/kosaquences/ The Woodhull Freedom Foundation made a statement on KOSA (a terribly authoritarian bill).

"Make 1984 fiction again"
1984 was never fiction. Big Brother is said to be inspired by folks like Joseph Stalin.

If you remember, the name of the totalitarian ideology in 1984 was English Socialism. Very prophetic.

Apparently, Apple now says they will pull their iMessage out of the U.K., if they implement their own British branded Chat Stasi.

Promising.

The Q film is about devious modelling agencies which trick parents and covertly traffick little kids over the southern border down into Latin America for someone to do unspeakable things to them.

It seems to have more to do with the insecurities of the person who made the film than any sort of real phenomena.

The actor who plays the main character is a believer in the Q conspiracy theory and openly promoted it, as did the "character" he plays as.

See, the main character was not entirely fictional. He was based on a real person who ran a grift where he made misleading claims about participating in fighting trafficking and he promoted savior type theatrics.

All kinds of conspiracies were promoted by him (and this other guy). Wayfair trafficking children in bits of furniture (come on...). Demonic blood rituals.

Truthfully speaking, he was a rather fringe figure, who was covered by very few progressive outlets, and now, he is getting more attention due to this film.

It's mentioned here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_of_the_children

"Won't anyone please think of the children?" is a phrase from The Simpsons where someone keeps interrupting with that at inappropriate times.

"The Commission also noted that measures which are sensitive to fundamental rights cannot be left to the discretion of private companies."
They say this but they'll probably just consult with that Hollywood actor which made a start-up selling scanning software for his bad take.

https://edri.org/our-work/voluntary-detection-measures-still-on-the-table-for-the-csa-regulation/
This is like the worst of all worlds.

Both Big Tech over-reach and government over-reach, however, I actually trust Big Tech here more than the E.U., even though I think Big Tech can over-reach.

The ideal would be to strike out the government authoritarianism and to rein Big Tech in, although that is probably a pipe dream.

"From the very start of the negotiations, EFF has opposed the draft convention as a whole, deeming it unnecessary."
I like this position.

There are already treaties and arrangements for cross-border collaboration in investigating crime, although it seems they want to cut some corners here and there.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/07/first-draft-un-cybercrime-treaty-drops-troubling-provisions-dangerous-and-open U.N. Cybercrime Treaty.

Well, it's a big improvement, although as EFF notes, there are still concerns.

Seeing someone digging into Minister Yeşilgöz and discovering other emotionally driven "Won't anyone please think of the children?" arguments which aren't well substantiated, lol.

Child predators have used a minors' personal info to extort those minors before.

Teaching them not to share that (even with a platform) is probably a good idea. It is also, among many reasons, why I dislike FB's link your face to an account model.

I suppose it fits better with the paternalistic mindset (on Apple's part), rather than leaning more on education (and hiding information about yourself whenever is reasonable).

Curious how both Apple and the Q film assume little kids (under 13s) when the age group which is far more likely to be implicated are more of an older sort.

Part of the motivation for this, and what partially led to it, came from them wanting to get this "ugly" aspect of their lives (her existence) out of the public eye.

At the very least, that is what I'm hearing. It's hard to say for sure.

https://allthatsinteresting.com/rosemary-kennedy
Since there is a Kennedy talking a load of rubbish, here's a reminder that the Kennedys destroyed their daughters life, by giving her a lobotomy, because she was apparently, sexually promiscuous.