SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:
Analysis: In a massive win for privacy rights, the advocate general advising the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has said that national security concerns should not override citizens' data privacy.
That doesn't mean that the intelligence and security services should oblige communications companies to hand over information, especially when it comes to terrorism suspects, the opinion, handed down yesterday, proposes. But it would mean that those requests will need to be done "on an exceptional and temporary basis," as opposed to sustained blanket harvesting of information – and only when justified by "overriding considerations relating to threats to public security or national security."
In other words, a US-style hovering [sic] up of personal data is not legal under European law.
The legal argument being made by the AG is technically advisory - the ECJ has yet to decide - though in roughly 80 per cent of cases it does side with the preliminary opinion put forward by its Advocate General, in this case Manuel Campos Sánchez-Bordona.
If the ECJ agrees, it could also have significant implications for the UK which has passed a law that gives the security services extraordinary reach and powers – which is in a legal limbo due to the ongoing Brexit plans to leave the European Union.
If this proposed legal solution is adopted by the court, the UK will be able to retain its current laws, though it would almost certainly face legal challenges and would have a hard time reaching an agreement with Europe over data-sharing – something that could have enormous security and economic implications.
The case itself was sparked by a legal challenge from Privacy International against the UK's Investigatory Powers Act (IPA) as well as a French data retention law.
In essence, the issue was whether national governments can oblige private parties - in this case, mostly ISPs - to hand over personal details by simply saying there were national security issues at hand.
The AG opines that no, it cannot: the European Directive on privacy and electronic communications continues to apply, and is not superseded by security claims. It does not apply to public bodies who are obliged to do what the government says.
-- submitted from IRC
(Score: 3, Interesting) by jmichaelhudsondotnet on Saturday January 18 2020, @06:48PM (8 children)
Jordan Peterson is preaching to choirs all over the united states that you don't get 'rights without responsibilty', indicating he does not, in his million/year wisdom, understand what a right is.
Snowden said in clear language, 'europeans get less rights than americans' from the nsa and cia.
Arjen Camphuis before he disappeared himself for his own safety, tried to convince europeans that nothing they did would have any meaning if the NSA copied all traffic at the router, which is what is still happening and still being shared with israel.
So it is nice to watch this little tea party make a positive decision for theoretical rights, but the fact of the matter is, every investigator in the Hague who is going to investigate Israel for warcrimes cannot communicate without it going directly to the campaign against the investigation. Inviting all manner of electronic harassment and stalking., which I have myself am already experiencing and can report it is a nightmare.
The wires copy the traffic to Utah and Jerusalem, then to who knows where. There is no point to any discussion of privacy until that stops, and there is no entity, that I know of, capable of 1. forcing the u.s. military and israeli networks like Akamai, to stop, and 2. being able to audit said systems for privacy even with all the kings men and all the kings horses.
And the fact that the people reading this, 90% will have never heard these ideas, is a sign of how rapidly we are heading towards a two tiered oligarch/everyone else system of governance, where all of our voting, all of our writing, all of our protesting, is utterly meaningless kabuki theater.
The people writing these claptrap articles are getting paid to propagate a discussion at the farcical level of things, meanwhile I can't earn a single dollar for my extensive work trying to publicize and clarify these issues, or even find a reporter besides Barrett Brown who will seriously discuss the experience of people who find themselves, unless it is already famous milquetoast such as Ronan Farrow or Paul Krugman now, in the crosshairs.
Really read these memes closely, and think like your life depends on it because it just might:
https://archive.is/hloUM [archive.is] dali
https://archive.is/2MFbn [archive.is] brooks lol
https://archive.is/xPOYX [archive.is] gmail 2020
https://archive.is/GBoQt [archive.is] new rights
https://archive.is/YkJr8 [archive.is] zersetzung warning
https://archive.is/ZK7up [archive.is] neo in bubble
https://archive.is/TmRS6 [archive.is] end game
https://archive.ph/l1urH [archive.ph] exceptionalism
https://archive.is/cKeB9 [archive.is] metalocalyspie convo
https://archive.ph/T95pm [archive.ph] mcmahon probable cause
https://archive.is/Eu1Z4 [archive.is] mcmahon incite
https://archive.ph/cVZBQ [archive.ph] foreign spy convo
https://archive.is/EoIML [archive.is] nsa convo israel
https://archive.is/5II5U [archive.is] us army main quest
BUT IF THERE WERE JUST ONE to consider it would be this one:
https://archive.is/HTALt [archive.is]
We were told this surveillance would catch bad guys, but it doesn't. Now we can't go back to believing that assload. Epstein cannot be erased. 13 year old girls should be protected from epstein under any definition of 'national security', or was I raised on a different planet?
Mona Lisa Smile Cow Vr, oh gosh I like this one....
https://archive.is/L7LfU [archive.is]
And the new spicy hotness, 8chan censorship edition, ala Pleasantville, my masterpiece, for western civilization, please enjoy:
https://archive.is/5b8cm [archive.is]
Argue with me if I you think I am wrong. Contribute if I am right and you are not homeless. Or say something nice. But this is no time to sit on the sidelines.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 18 2020, @11:07PM
It is meant to protect the wealthy's investment in girls and boys they are using as their playthings, by making it possible for them to rapidly and easily hunt them down before they can get word out about the abuse they suffered. And that is only the ones who have not been gas-lighted or Stockholmed into believing their captors desires are the best way or their own thoughts.
The rot that Epstein represented runs far deeper than any of you can fathom, and unless you are willing to get your hands dirty to discover how deep, you will never know, and they will continue getting you to give up more essential rights and freedoms to protect the children (and later naive adults) for their own plundering.
(Score: 2) by Pslytely Psycho on Saturday January 18 2020, @11:25PM (6 children)
"Contribute if I am right and you are not homeless."
What do you have against the homeless?
Many people in this country are only a paycheck or two away from homelessness. Once there, regaining gainful employment is exceptionally difficult, even with assistance from an underfunded, uncaring 'safety net.'
Many more, like Michael David Crawford, before his suicide, drift between homelessness and shelter due to mental illness.
A tad elitist don't you think?
Alex Jones lawyer inspires new TV series: CSI Moron Division.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 19 2020, @01:30AM
Suicide? I read that he entered the witness protection program and now works as a diversity quota enforcer for Mozilla.
(Score: 2) by Common Joe on Sunday January 19 2020, @08:44AM (3 children)
jmichaelhudsondotnet can correct both of us if necessary, but I read that as:
if (you think I am wrong) then
Argue with me
else if (you are not homeless && you think I am right)
Contribute
else if (you are homeless)
do not contribute because your money is better put to use if it can be saved and put a roof over your head
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Pslytely Psycho on Sunday January 19 2020, @11:35AM (2 children)
I read it the way I did specifically because I know of at least one homeless person who contributes (not on this site however) by using the free computers at the library. It's warm, dry and has access to water and restroom. He has mental problems and writes on several blogs concerning his specific illnesses. (I buy him a sandwich and a cup of coffee from the diner next door when I see him, I don't give him cash as it would end up in a beer bottle as alcoholism is one of his many problems) Like MDC, he is reasonably intelligent, but paranoid beyond belief and difficult to get to know.
He's quite a nice guy but very shy due to his paranoia. Took quite a while to get him to open up at all, and even then it's pretty minimal, for example he won't tell you his last name and depending on his mood, his first name is either 'Carl,' 'Mick,' or 'Dale.'
I am a bit concerned for him due to his advanced age and the cold weather recently as I haven't seen him in a several weeks. I hope it's due to being in a shelter or better yet, and actual apartment. As he does get a small government check, I hope it's the latter, even if it's only for the winter.
I got to know him initially when he left a coat behind at the library last summer, I found him a couple of blocks away and talked him into letting me drive him to the Union Gospel Mission. Since then I see him most Saturdays at the library.
Writing on a blog or news site doesn't have to cost money, and in his case, is probably therapeutic to some extent.
A good weekend to you both, Joe and Hudson.
Alex Jones lawyer inspires new TV series: CSI Moron Division.
(Score: 2) by Common Joe on Sunday January 19 2020, @12:07PM (1 child)
Ah, yes, ambiguity in spoken / written language strikes again. I think we both now see where the confusion came from. I think Hudson meant "contribute" in a monetary way while you interpreted it as non-monetary. It does lead to drastically different interpretations of the sentence.
I have to admit MDC's departure shook me. I may not have always agreed with him, but I almost always found his thoughtful contributions to SoylentNews highly enjoyable. I didn't know him personally, but I do miss him. I think it's awesome you talk with Carl/Mick/Dale on a regular basis.
Have a good weekend too.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 19 2020, @02:47PM
as a random internet user i was surprised to see the dialogue about someone having picked up on an unstated or implied bias.
i can see why a person considered to be homeless, but maybe capable of contributing, could be insulted if taking the statement that homeless need not apply/do not donate was some sort of bias. it could look like that.
but i also see it as something like what was already said... "use what you have more effectively than giving it to me". clearing up such ambiguity could sound like trying to wring more money out of people, like if it was stated "but when you can afford to, please donate to me". maybe not even mentioning it is the best thing to do--having to include a disclaimer for statements just takes away from the message if it requires explanation.
probably no offense was meant, and regardless, donations would still be taken. its up to the giver to decide if it is financially a good idea or if there are more pressing concerns.
(Score: 2) by jmichaelhudsondotnet on Sunday January 19 2020, @02:54PM
I am facing homelessness. No one has contribted yet, ever, to anything I write. :( (well some people have pointed out typos or said it is too long, etc)
You can imply that anyone who is on the brink, like you are describing, which has been by far the dominant experience I have had in the world too, is included in my 'hey don't feel bad if you just read and don't have anything to give'
It is just the sliding scale, brevity sacrifices precision sometimes and we have to clear it up with a short coversation like this.
I made these to describe my unapologetic stance and permanent class affinity, I hope people are sharing it widely. Because they are soon going to ask for us to pay back the same debt they stole too, they only got half of it from stealing our taxes and wages, the other half they got from borrowing under the promise we would be the ones to eventually pay it back once their elaborate dine-and-dash operation was complete and the united states was in shambles.
https://archive.is/ZinJT [archive.is] wage and property theft using interest
https://archive.is/bRCdQ [archive.is] blind us to it by controlling mass media
https://archive.is/dmjdm [archive.is] the left hand side of this is the big picture of how they are literally driving us insane and killing us through poverty
Interest. It is so evil.