Olives @olives@qoto.org

https://reason.com/2024/02/26/feds-target-journalist-tim-burke-with-law-intended-for-hackers/ What do you think of this case? #FirstAmendment

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2024/02/eff-statement-nevadas-attack-end-end-encryption

"EFF learned last week that the state of Nevada is seeking an emergency order prohibiting Meta from rolling out end-to-end encryption in Facebook Messenger for all users in the state under the age of 18."

"Encryption is the most vital means we have to protect privacy, which is especially important for young people online. Yet in the name of protecting children, Nevada seems to be arguing that merely offering encryption on a social media platform that Meta knows has been used by criminals is itself illegal. This cannot be the law; in practice it would let the state prohibit all platforms from offering encryption, and such a ruling would raise serious constitutional concerns."

#privacy

I suspect the frivolous lawsuit from Nevada comes from a desire to "punish Facebook", because they're seen as an unsympathetic bunch.

As we know though, even if they are an unsympathetic bunch, that is not an excuse for trying to set a dangerous precedent.

Someone should tell these politicians who enjoy locking people up (and ruining their lives...) that they need to carry their fetishes out consensually... Joking.

I wonder what has become of that frivolous lawsuit against Facebook's planned end-to-end encryption from Nevada's Attorney General.

I know this is a brazen assault on human rights, but because Papa ECHR hasn't told me off (yet?), I am going to insist on doing it. Screw you.

The British Government also has a problem where various parts of it don't seem to actually understand the law and you see them indulge in a censorial fantasy (which would be alarming, if true) x.x

They also conflate real content with fantasy content, rely on misleading misrepresentations of the effects on porn, and typically, people like this conflate animated violence with realistic violence, and mild "aggression" with what might more typically be viewed as "aggression". To put it simply, it is a mess, and extremely problematic.

As it turns out though, they're looking for submissions. #ukpol

If you're curious about the sorts of people who push for these sorts of things, one who appeared before parliamentarians is the U.K.-based Vice-President of an American bunch of Christian fundamentalists known as NCOSE (formerly known as Morality in Media)*, Haley McNamara.

These politicians also voice "concern" about something, then they push for broader censorship than that. For instance, this "baroness" appears to be looking to censor vast swathes of content. It is an extreme attack on free expression.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Center_on_Sexual_Exploitation
#ukpol

I suppose since the British government is at great risk of becoming puritanical fascists (if they're not already), as evidenced by the above meeting, I should repost my "porn isn't bad" science / knowledge pack* for #ukpol.

* https://qoto.org/@olives/111888946356326887

https://www.freespeechcoalition.com/blog/fsc-meets-with-baroness-conducting-review-of-uk-pornography-laws The Free Speech Coalition (no, not the one you are thinking of, the other one) meets puritanical anti-porn Tory appointee* who wants to censor porn in the #UK.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gabrielle_Bertin%2C_Baroness_Bertin

https://web.archive.org/web/20240218013044/https://legislature.vermont.gov/bill/status/2024/S.289 #KOSA-like censorship bill introduced in Vermont. #AADC

I see a "I work at Facebook. Please pass a very specific regulation which we can more readily comply with, but which would regulate my smaller competitors to death." take.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2024/02/eff-urges-ninth-circuit-reinstate-xs-legal-challenge-unconstitutional-california Interesting article.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2024/02/eff-opposes-california-initiative-would-cause-mass-censorship It's a pretty bad idea, all things considered. #FirstAmendment