Olives @olives@qoto.org

https://reclaimthenet.org/uk-government-proposals-would-allow-it-to-mass-surveil-all-users-of-an-internet-service-within-specific-timeframe

"The UK government has presented draft amendments to the Investigatory Powers Act (IPA) – otherwise known as “Snoopers Charter,” a highly controversial piece of legislation allowing for wide-scale spying by intelligence agencies.

The plan now is to specify that the authorities have the right to carry out mass surveillance of an internet service within a specific timeframe – and do so “dragnet-style,” by spying on all users of that service during a given time."

"One of the things that came out of the plan being publicly presented by the UK’s king last Tuesday was that there was an idea to introduce the power of veto if and when privately-owned (mostly US) social platforms decide to usher in some “privacy-friendly” features.

Some reports mention that one of the proposed provisions would mean that should globally operating tech/social media companies decide to increase security of their products (the implication here is not difficult to make – it highly likely refers to encryption), they would have to have the UK spying community’s “blessing” first."

#privacy

https://www.techdirt.com/2023/11/14/uk-government-leaders-say-investigatory-powers-act-isnt-awful-enough-announce-plans-to-make-it-worse/

"The UK government thinks the 2016 Investigatory Powers Act is due for an overhaul. But it has plenty of opposition. Some of the proposed amendments actually appear to be illegal. And at least one major tech company has threatened to exit the market if the proposed amendments become law."

"According to this fact sheet, service providers will now be required to retain certain internet browsing records created by their users."

"The proposed changes would also expand the definition of bulk personal datasets (BPDs) to cover data collected by third parties, like data brokers. And, while this isn’t technically a “new” power it is definitely an expansion of the government’s existing power"

"The bill would also increase the duration of a BPD warrant from six to twelve months"

"“Greater operational agility” is just a fancy way of saying “make things easier.” When you start altering the rules to increase law enforcement efficiency, you tend to turn protected rights into privileges that only need to be respected when they’re not inconveniencing law enforcement.

None of this is law. Yet. But it’s clear those heading the government firmly believe this is the right way to go."

https://www.techdirt.com/2023/11/13/new-israeli-law-makes-consuming-terrorist-content-a-criminal-offense/

"And now we learn that Israel’s government has taken the next step in amending its counterterrorism laws to make the consumption of “terrorist” content a criminal offense, punishable with jail time."

"Make no mistake, this is the institution of thought crime. Read those two paragraphs one more time and realize just how much the criminalization of consumption of materials relies on the judgement and interpretation of those enforcing it. What is systematic in terms of this law? What is a publication? What constitutes a “terrorist organization,” not in the case of Hamas and ISIL, but in that ominous bit at the end of the second paragraph, where more organizations can — and will — be added to this list?

And most importantly, how in the world is the Israeli government going to determine “circumstances that indicate identification with the terrorist organization?”"

"This has all the hallmarks of America’s overreaction to the 9/11 attacks. We still haven’t unwound, not even close, all of the harm that was done in the aftermath of those attacks, all in the name of safety. We are still at a net-negative value in terms of our civil liberties due to that overreaction."

https://qoto.org/@olives/111083302650803082 Porn is not linked to bad things.
https://qoto.org/@olives/111191543236620885 Multiple thousand word commentary on conflations.

Two useful ones for #Altersverifikation as there are bad faith actors who like to conflate porn / fiction / fantasy with abuse (when it's really freedom of expression).

Training a model on personal social media posts (text) might lead to privacy leaks, so I'd suggest against this practice (hopefully, it's not a thing, or too much of a thing).

https://qoto.org/@olives/111083302650803082 A short anti-porn starter kit. Convenient as other threads can be heavier. This was actually intended to deal with one specific situation. Could say that about the other one too, honestly.

https://qoto.org/@olives/111191543236620885 Dive into why muddling abuse with fiction (mentions the bad actors who deliberately try to muddy the waters by conflating the two) is bad. Thousands of words.

I think that Palestine has always been an example of a spot where hate speech standards tend to get really fuzzy.

It's just far more apparent now with the current conflict.

Since Germany is accused of blocking porn sites, seemingly because of a crazy rogue official, I think it is a good idea to always contact lawmakers to oppose that (and any other censorship).

Maybe, it has something to do with that really weird obscure bureaucrat who was abusing his power.

Apparently, Germany's "age verification" law is not compatible with E.U. Law and the European Commission told them off about it.

That would be an actually good idea, though who knows where that'll go with this chat control garbage.

Important one to remember. #chatcontrol

It sounds like you should contact lawmakers in the E.U. Parliament and tell them to oppose such authoritarianism. #chatcontrol

If true, it is extremely problematic (and harmful) for "age verification" to be a condition of accessing a porn platform.

That is a threat to freedom of expression and privacy. Scammers have been known to impersonate "age verification" providers.

#chatcontrol

https://qoto.org/@olives/111407938871651520 Covered a similar thing here.

https://www.wndu.com/2023/11/13/indiana-senator-files-bill-require-age-verification-porn-sites/
This is bad for privacy, freedom of expression, and security. It is also an undue burden for many websites and users.

It is also a very obvious violation of the First Amendment. Anonymous speech is protected by the First Amendment, as is the ability to access that speech.

It also would not deter someone from doing this, and attempted enforcement would only be harmful to everyone involved.

Their worries also appear to be scientifically baseless (https://qoto.org/@olives/111083302650803082). Even if they were not, it would still be incredibly disproportionate.

https://www.npr.org/2023/11/09/1211949718/the-kinsey-institute-faces-possible-separation-from-indiana-university
The State of Indiana also appears to be defunding sex sciences.

I strongly recommend contacting lawmakers to oppose this piece of legislation. #privacy

Thierry all full of himself (and stirring up trouble) is a good example of why you don't give power to the government. They're not your friends.

Remember this. #kosa

I don't think the chat control compromise is good either, it seems to have room for over-reach.

It is better than the previous proposal which was absolutely insane.