#EU General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR)

[trainsinanime]

I've seen a number of people worried and concerned about this language on Ao3s current "agree to these terms of service" page. The short version is:

Don't worry. This isn't anything bad. Checking that box just means you forgive them for being US American.

Long version: This text makes perfect sense if you're familiar with the issues around GDPR and in particular the uncertainty about Privacy Shield and SCCs after Schrems II. But I suspect most people aren't, so let's get into it, with the caveat that this is a Eurocentric (and in particular EU centric) view of this.

The basic outline is that Europeans in the EU have a right to privacy under the EU's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), an EU directive (let's simplify things and call it an EU law) that regulates how various entities, including companies and the government, may acquire, store and process data about you.

The list of what counts as data about you is enormous. It includes things like your name and birthday, but also your email address, your computers IP address, user names, whatever. If an advertiser could want it, it's on the list.

The general rule is that they can't, unless you give explicit permission, or it's for one of a number of enumerated reasons (not all of which are as clear as would be desirable, but that's another topic). You have a right to request a copy of the data, you have a right to force them to delete their data and so on. It's not quite on the level of constitutional rights, but it is a pretty big deal.

In contrast, the US, home of most of the world's internet companies, has no such right at a federal level. If someone has your data, it is fundamentally theirs. American police, FBI, CIA and so on also have far more rights to request your data than the ones in Europe.

So how can an American website provide services to persons in the EU? Well… Honestly, there's an argument to be made that they can't.

US websites can promise in their terms and conditions that they will keep your data as safe as a European site would. In fact, they have to, unless they start specifically excluding Europeans. The EU even provides Standard Contract Clauses (SCCs) that they can use for this.

However, e.g. Facebook's T&Cs can't bind the US government. Facebook can't promise that it'll keep your data as secure as it is in the EU even if they wanted to (which they absolutely don't), because the US government can get to it easily, and EU citizens can't even sue the US government over it.

Despite the importance that US companies have in Europe, this is not a theoretical concern at all. There have been two successive international agreements between the US and the EU about this, and both were struck down by the EU court as being in violation of EU law, in the Schrems I and Schrems II decisions (named after Max Schrems, an Austrian privacy activist who sued in both cases).

A third international agreement is currently being prepared, and in the meantime the previous agreement (known as "Privacy Shield") remains tentatively in place. The problem is that the US government does not want to offer EU citizens equivalent protection as they have under EU law; they don't even want to offer US citizens these protections. They just love spying on foreigners too much. The previous agreements tried to hide that under flowery language, but couldn't actually solve it. It's unclear and in my opinion unlikely that they'll manage to get a version that survives judicial review this time. Max Schrems is waiting.

So what is a site like Ao3 to do? They're arguably not part of the problem, Max Schrems keeps suing Meta, not the OTW, but they are subject to the rules because they process stuff like your email address.

Their solution is this checkbox. You agree that they can process your data even though they're in the US, and they can't guarantee you that the US government won't spy on you in ways that would be illegal for the government of e.g. Belgium. Is that legal under EU law? …probably as legal as fan fiction in general, I suppose, which is to say let's hope nobody sues to try and find out.

But what's important is that nothing changed, just the language. Ao3 has always stored your user name and email address on servers in the US, subject to whatever the FBI, CIA, NSA and FRA may want to do it. They're just making it more clear now.

[kde-plasma-official]

Hey guys, quick PSA on Meta and them using your data for AI training:

Since April 7 this year they have a new privacy policy in place that, if you don't opt-out, will use your:

name

user name, profile picture, description

avatar

reels

photos and their descriptions

comments

from Instagram, your

name

user name, profile picture

avatar

posts

activity in public groups, channels, on public pages

comments

reviews and posts on Facebook marketplace

from Facebook, and your

profile picture, status

avatar

descriptions of groups / channels you created and joined

any conversations you held with Meta AI

any group chats you added Meta AI to

in WhatsApp to train their Meta AI models.

This change will start on May 27th, setting the deadline to the 26th to decline to their use of data.

How do you opt out? Meta provided two opt-out forms for that:

For Facebook, fill out this form,

For Instagram there is this one,

For WhatsApp, use this link and then pick the "Data Subject Rights Form" (translation may vary). Then pick the third option. Read through the links they gave you (or don't) and at the bottom select "I want to make an objection". Then fill out with your Email address and Phone number used for WhatsApp. Pick a real E-Mail address, they get back to you. You will have to explain yourself to them. If you are from the EU and need a template try the following:

I am exercising my rights under Article 21 of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) to object to the processing of my personal data on the basis of legitimate interests.

I also object to the use of any of my data for AI training purposes. This includes, but is not limited to, the collection, storage, analysis, profiling, sharing, and any other form of processing of my personal data as stated in your privacy policy.

The processing under "legitimate interests" affects my fundamental rights to privacy and data protection as guaranteed under the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (Articles 7 and 8). Specifically, it impacts my right to control how and when my personal data is used, shared, and profiled without my explicit consent.

I request that you immediately cease all processing activities related to my personal data where "legitimate interests" is the basis. I request any of this data to be deleted. Furthermore, I request that you confirm in writing that these activities have been ceased and data has been deleted.

This is just thrown together in hopes that it sounds like I know my stuff. If you are not from the EU, try reading through it anyways, compare the articles stated in my template with something from your country. Usually there's always a loophole if you look hard enough.

For Facebook and Instagram you have to be logged in with an account to use these forms, but once you are logged in, you can enter any email you want to. If you have multiple accounts, click the link multiple times, one for each email address.

You just need to log in to one account, not all of them.

You don't need to provide a reason.

They should auto-accept your request and send you an Email with confirmation.

Edit: WhatsApp Link Edit edit: WhatsApp Link (again) and template I used

[taikeero-lecoredier]

Chat Control in a nutshell (please reblog this, US people)

Find out more about Chat Control here TAKE ACTION HERE ! OR HERE Calling is much more efficient ! The latter link will redirect you to the official websites of your respective reps. Under the "read more", you will find what you need to say/write when contacting your reps. You will also find an alternate format of this comic,and I give explicit permission for people to translate it and spread it anywhere for awareness. Credit really not needed, I don't care about that rn Even if this is a EU proposal, I am urging Americans to also share this, since it goes hand in hand with KOSA. DON'T FORGET TO JOIN OUR DISCORD SERVER AGAINST CHAT CONTROL ! https://discord.com/invite/e7FYdYnMkS

(Latest update on Chat Control was the 12 september 2024) This is a little long, so feel free to shorten it as you wish : Subject line: "2022/0155(COD) Dear Sir/Madam, I am writing to express my grave concerns regarding the proposed introduction of "Chat Control" This measure poses a serious threat to the privacy and fundamental rights of all EU citizens and stands in stark contradiction to the core principles that the European Union seeks to uphold. The proposed Chat Control contravenes Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which guarantee the right to respect for private and family life and the protection of personal data. The indiscriminate surveillance of private messages without specific suspicion or cause directly violates these fundamental rights. The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) sets out stringent rules for the processing of personal data. The proposed indiscriminate surveillance and scanning of private messages before end-to-end encryption is fundamentally incompatible with the principles of data minimization and purpose limitation enshrined in the GDPR. Specifically, Articles 5 and 6 of the GDPR, which govern the lawfulness and principles of data processing, would be violated by the introduction of such measures. The implementation of Client-Side Scanning (CSS) on devices means that all messages and files are scanned on the user's device before being encrypted and sent. This effectively nullifies the protection offered by end-to-end encryption and opens the door to misuse and additional security vulnerabilities. Moreover, the technical capability to scan such content could be exploited by malicious actors to circumvent or manipulate surveillance mechanisms. Such far-reaching surveillance measures not only endanger privacy but also freedom of expression. The knowledge that their private messages are being scanned and monitored could significantly restrict individuals' willingness to freely express themselves. Additionally, trust in digital communication platforms would be severely undermined. I urge you to take a strong stance against this disproportionate and unlawful measure. The privacy and digital rights of EU citizens must be safeguarded. It is imperative that we protect our fundamental rights and ensure transparency in the decision-making processes of our leaders. For more detailed information on the proposal and its implications, please refer to the following resource: Link to Netzpolitik article. https://www.patrick-breyer.de/rat-soll-chatkontrolle-durchwinken-werde-jetzt-aktiv/ Thank you for your attention to this critical matter. Sincerely, [Name] Art. 10 GG , Art. 8 & 11 EU Charta , Art. 8 EMRK (Alternate comic here V)

[brf-rumortrackinganon]

“Then there's the follow-up issue: who knew what when?”

Equally important could they prove it if they were going to denounce the Sussex’s?

Remember the Sussex’s not only didn’t use NHS/Royal gynaecologist they also did not disclose who did deliver Archie.

Additionally we now have GDPR law which would be bumping up against perrage law aka of the body.

It would not have been an issue before 2018:

“In the UK, medical privacy is protected by a combination of laws and common law duties, primarily the Data Protection Act 2018 (which implements the EU General Data Protection Regulation - GDPR) and the common law duty of confidentiality. These rules ensure that personal health information is handled responsibly and that patients have the right to access and control their data.”



The BRF cannot medically confirm or prove anything without violating Meghan's medical privacy.

It will take either the doctors speaking out on their own or the surrogate, and I bet they are NDA'd up the wahoo for this. Alternatively Harry or Meghan could do the reveal themselves but I don't think that's possible.

(But never say never - Meghan did very much tell everyone she was cheating on Cory with Harry on the podcast a couple weeks ago when she talked about how they dated for six months before the relationship was outed. The relationship outed in early November, so six months before that is early May, when Meghan was very much dating Cory and which Vanity Fair reported before Meghan called the writer demanding they change it to July, which the writer did and which he also later wrote about/told people about, which Bower then dug up for Revenge.)

And even if it was a third person who did the reveal, this is absolutely something Meghan would sue over so everyone has to tread very carefully. Meaning the only thing they can really do is look for photographs or recordings of Meghan not visibly pregnant when she was supposed to be. Which is kind of a tall order to begin with.

That's why I think even if William pulled the titles, it would be on the grounds of Harry having broken the terms of the Sandringham Summit.

[mariacallous]

Big Tech may have found their response to the European Union’s (EU) digital competition and content moderation policies: tariffs. “We’re going to work with President Trump to push back on governments around the world,” Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg said in his announcement eliminating the company’s fact-checkers. President Trump, of course, has described himself as a “Tariff Man.”

Europe’s “ever-increasing number of laws, institutionalizing censorship” were number one on the Zuckerberg target list. The only way Meta “can push back on this global trend is with the support of the U.S. government,” he explained, adding, “that’s why it’s been so difficult over the past four years when even the U.S. government has pushed for censorship.”

The semantic conflation of curatorial responsibility and censorship, a familiar domestic political gambit, has been internationalized and weaponized to attack the expectation—at least in Europe—that media platforms like Meta should practice responsible content curation.

Tariffs and truth

Thanks to intensive lobbying by Big Tech, the U.S. Congress has done little to provide meaningful oversight of the digital platform companies. The tech CEOs invited to the Trump inaugural lead companies that dominate the free flow of information, invade personal privacy, and pervert the competitive marketplace. Yet, these companies have been able to avoid meaningful domestic oversight for their entire existence.

The void created by American inaction has been filled by EU regulations despite the companies’ strong objections. Combining claims of censorship with Donald Trump’s affinity for tariffs just might be the leverage Big Tech seeks against the EU’s digital policies. Mark Zuckerberg appears ready to spearhead the effort.

By framing the EU’s actions as “institutionalizing censorship,” and asserting that the EU is “going after American companies and pushing to censor more,” Zuckerberg presses all the right MAGA buttons to provide a rationale for the Trump administration to fight the EU’s decisions. It is not a surprising strategy, and is made even more significant because it reverses previous corporate policy.

After the January 6 insurrection, Facebook along with Twitter suspended Donald Trump’s account. “They shouldn’t be allowed to get away with this censoring and silencing,” President Trump said at the time. Accusing Zuckerberg of plotting against him, Trump wrote in a 2024 book that the Meta CEO could, “spend the rest of his life in prison.”

Meta’s 2025 policy switch, however, has been met with the new president’s approval. Asked if Meta was responding to his earlier threats, Trump replied, “probably,” adding, “I think they have come a long way.” 

What’s the fuss over EU regulation?

The EU has enacted multiple laws to try and provide oversight of the previously unsupervised activities of Big Tech. It started in 2018 with privacy protection under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). In 2022, the European Parliament passed the Digital Markets Act (DMA) to deal with the lack of digital marketplace competition. Twenty-twenty-four saw the AI Act (AI) establishing a regulatory framework for artificial intelligence.

All these actions were aggressively fought by Big Tech. But for social media companies, the EU legislation that is the biggest challenge is the 2022 Digital Services Act (DSA). This law covers a handful of online platform companies deemed pervasive enough to be “gatekeepers” with a new style of regulation.

Instead of the traditional form of regulatory oversight that micromanages how a company operates, the DSA establishes expectations for what the company will deliver.  These expectations include content moderation and transparency. The law does not specify how moderation is achieved, but that it is being done in a meaningful and significant manner. Far from regulatory micromanagement of corporate operations, the companies are required to self-certify that they are delivering on the law’s expectations. If they are not, then there are penalties.

While Meta has eliminated fact-checking in the U.S., it has not done so in the EU. It is hard to certify content moderation, as the DSA requires, when you’ve fired all the moderators. This has created a conflict between the company’s U.S. practices and EU requirements. Even if it represents a legal problem, the decision is good for the company since social media platforms, such as Meta, thrive on engagement-stimulating, unedited rage, and bottom-line profits should increase with the elimination of fact-checking jobs.

Elon Musk and NATO—a signal?

Comments by Vice President Vance during the 2024 campaign hinted at leveraging the power of the federal government to deal with DSA requirements. Asked in an interview whether American support of NATO could hinge on whether the EU regulated Elon Musk’s social media platform X, Vance responded affirmatively.

“So, what America should be saying is, if NATO wants us to continue supporting them and NATO wants us to continue to be a good participant in this military alliance, why don’t you respect American values and respect free speech?” Vance said. “It’s insane that we would support a military alliance if that military alliance isn’t going to be pro-free speech. I think we can do both. But we’ve got to say American power comes with certain strings attached. One of those is respect free speech, especially in our European allies.”

These comments reveal a willingness to link trade and security to digital regulation. A tariff-based response to EU policies seems plausible under such a mindset.

A regulation vs. trade crusade?

On his first day as President of the United States, Donald Trump said “tariff is the most beautiful word in the dictionary.” A few days later, he threatened the EU with tariffs unless they bought more U.S. oil and gas.  

The U.S. has a trade deficit with the EU when it comes to goods such as oil and gas but a favorable trade balance when it comes to services such as those of Big Tech. The challenge, therefore, is not to use tariffs to force the EU to buy more, but, as Zuckerberg told the Joe Rogan podcast, “the United States should be defending its companies.”

Caught between a U.S. Congress that has done little to protect against misinformation and hate, and the world’s second largest trading block which has tried to combine freedom of expression and the expectation of curatorial responsibility, Big Tech faces a dilemma. The combined arguments of censorship and defending American companies is a powerful elixir served to an audience of one man.

Wall Street analysts hail Mark Zuckerberg as “the best CEO of our time” for his ability to align Meta’s self-interest with prevailing political winds. The emerging narrative of “censorship vs. trade” is a powerful, if calculated, political move. Threatening tariffs in response to EU digital regulations could be a strategy that appeals to “Tariff Man.”

Ironically, this push comes at a time when artificial intelligence offers low-cost tools for fact-checking and content moderation. Yet, the political calculus behind the “censorship vs. trade” strategy may overshadow technical realities.

Mark Zuckerberg’s maneuvering is a shrewd effort to redefine the debate about European digital regulation. The question now becomes whether President Trump will add relaxed enforcement of the EU’s digital laws—all of them—to his list of trade demands.

[theyhavetakenovermylife]

im not gonna lie, a little sad n disappointed that u use genAI for images…

Not gonna lie, I am very sad and disappointed that this is a conversation that is need to be had, on the platform of a TMNT reader insert writer. A conversation base of an image, created for the soul purpose of creating a idea for an outfit in a smut, generated in a part of the world, where AI regulations are becoming more and more strict (which I fully support, may I add), with the focus on ethical usage of Data and AI, among many other laws that are put in place to protect people's jobs and their personal data.

I live in the EU - one of the places with the most strict laws when it comes to personal data, and one of the first places to actually put an AI law into place. The AI act of 2024.

To those of you that do not know about the EU AI act, you can read about it here on the EU Parliament's webside: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/topics/en/article/20230601STO93804/eu-ai-act-first-regulation-on-artificial-intelligence

In other words, the EU wants AI to help create jobs and job opportunities, not steal them. Part of that is classifiactions. The AI I used to help give the reader an idea of what Bluestar's outfit would be (which I also disclosed as an AI image, as the law requrise in this part of the world), is classified as a low/lower-risk generative AI, that has to follow transparency requirements and the EU copyright law.

I do not know how other countries tackles AI, nor what laws they are planning on putting in place. I follow along in the EU and Danish conversations and laws about AI, as they actually are a big part of my studies as a future pedagog.

Part of my job is to look at AI as an aiding tool - not an overtaker. More specifically, I am learning how I can use AI as a tool for people in our community, at may have limited ways of expression or need extra help. Along with that, I also have make sure that the AI used, aline with the EU GDPR law (General Data Protection Regulation), as that is very much a big part of not just my future job, but everyone else's in the EU.

Now, I've just told you about the EU AI Act of 2024, but not how my country of Denmark has been talking and putting in protective measures on AI since 2019, with the focus on ethical usage of AI, aka protecting people and their jobs. Heck, this is the country that outlawed Uber, because it took jobs from Taxi drivers.

Companies in Denmark has been requred - by law - to report on their use of AI and Data Ethics since 2021. In other words, my country take AI and data very seriously, and don't mess around when it come to that.

Why this focus on the EU and Denmark you may ask? Well, that's because all of these laws and proposed laws, are some that I follow on a daily basis as a Danish citizen. A country that has focused on the digital ethics for years. I live in a country, where we teach children how to use AI in an ethical manner, and where we teach university how to use AI as a tool - a compliment to their studies - and not something that is supposed to take over their studies, rendering them obsolete.

I'm sorry, but whatever lack of rules and regualtions other countries may have, does not apply to me, and the increasingly strict set of rules I have to follow in my country.

I am very aware that people in Hollywood are losing their jobs due to AI, and I think it's horrifing. I'm very aware that graffic designers in other countries have lost jobs to AI, and it makes me very sad. But I am not a lord of regulations in other countries - missing or not. I am just a Danish citizen, following the Danish law and rules, and whether or not other places will look at such rules and laws themselves, I have no control over.

I am sad and disappointed in the comments in my Inbox, that is calling me all sorts of names, saying that I don't care about the environment, because I generated an AI image, totally disregarding the fact that I live in one of the most carbon neutral cities in the western world, and not knowing that I was one of the first generations of students, studying at the Danish FN's World Goals profile schools.

I am sad and disappointed in the comments in my Inbox, telling me i am uneducated, when this is literally part of my studies. When my studies and future job opportunities - among many others -, literally requries that I'm up to date with the laws regarding data and AI usage for my own country, and have been doing so, ever since I first started working in 2020.

I am sad and disappointed in the comments in my Inbox saying that I am ruining the job opportunities, because I didn't pay an artist to illustrate an image. What money may I ask you? I'm a student, doing this for free, because I enjoy it, with literally no monetary gains from this, what so ever. So what money??

I am sad and disappointed that the platform I use to write TMNT stories, should now become a ground for dicussions about AI, when that is something that should be taken up with the rule makers of where ever you live, and not a TMNT reader insert writer on Tumblr.

I refuse to take further part in the discussion about AI using my Tumblr platform, only deciding to do so now, as many messages I started recivieng were hurtful, starting to boarder on the abusive.

I leave you with this power point, showing you how AI is viewed along side jobs and people's job views and opportunities in Denmark as by 2024, made by the Nordic firm Implement Consultation Group.

Remember to treat each other with kindness, and understand the round world is different everywhere💚

[brookstonalmanac]

Holidays 5.25

Holidays

Africa Day

African Freedom Day (Zambia)

African Languages Day

African Liberation Day (Rastafari)

Amateur Radio Military Appreciation Day

Bojangles Day

Chuquisaca (Bolivia)

Cookie Monster Day

Cultural Workers and Folk Artists Day (Ukraine)

Day of Youth (Yugoslavia)

Dexful Reistence Day (Iran)

EMS Save-A-Life Day

Flitting Day (Scotland)

Geek Pride Day

George Floyd Remembrance Day

Global Change Leadership Day

GDPR Day (a.k.a. General Data Protection Regulation Day; EU)

Global Planking Day

Global Surgery Day

The Glorious 25 Day (a.k.a. Glorious Revolution, Glorious 25th of May; Discworld)

Grand Prix de Monaco begins (Monaco)

Gypsy Day

Heroes’ Day (Lesotho)

Integrity Day (Scientology)

International Day of Heroes of the Fight Against Totalitarianism

International Missing Children’s Day (UN)

International Planking Day

International Plastic Free Day

International Skin Pigmentation Day

Kids Ocean Day (California)

Languedoc Day

Last Bell (Russia, post-Soviet countries) [5/25 or Friday before, if falls on a weekend]

Lemon Balm Day (French Republic)

Liberation Day (Lebanon)

Local Radio Day (UK)

Locro Day (Argentina)

Maddie May Day

May Revolution Day (Argentina)

National Adoption Day (Brazil)

National Ahmad “Captain Poodaman” Butler Day

National Bath Bomb Day

National Don't Utter a Word Day

National Family Fun Day

National Hometown Area Local Day

National Missing Children's Day (US)

National Sing Out Day

National Tap Dance Day

National VTuber Day

Peruvian Clown Day (Peru)

Poetry Day (Florida)

Ramsey Lewis Day

Saint Cool Day

Self-Reliance Day

Senior Health & Fitness Day

South Liberation Day (Lebanon)

Standardization and Metrology Employees Day (Tajikistan)

Star Wars Day

Stinky Pee Day

Tap Dance Day

Towel Day (Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy)

Turkmen Carpet Day (Turkmenistan)

World Fish Migration Day

World Football Day

World Tarot Day

World Thyroid Day

Food & Drink Celebrations

National Brown Bag It Day [also Last Wednesday]

National Italian Beer Day

National Wine Day (US)

Nature Celebrations

Common Arens (Geum urbanum)

International Heritage Breeds Day

Pansy Day (Pure Love; Korean Birth Flowers)

Independence, Flag & Related Days

Empire of New Prussia (Declared; 2018) [unrecognized]

First Government Day (Argentina; Sudan)

Jordan (from UK, 1946)

Kingdom of Africa (Declared; 2020) [unrecognized]

Kingdom of Sycamore (Declared; 2018) [unrecognized]

Lunataria (Declared; 2022) [unrecognized]

Neo-Dumnonii Kingdom (Declared; 2016) [unrecognized]

New Mexico (State Constitution adopted; 1850)

Pilatia (Declared; 2022) [unrecognized]

Transjordan (Independence Proclaimed; 1923)

4th & Last Sunday in May

Botanic Gardens Day (Australia) [Last Sunday]

Cavalcata Sarda (Sardinia) [Last Sunday]

Children’s Day (Hungary) [Last Sunday]

Indianapolis 500 Race Day [Sunday before Memorial Day/8 Days before 1st Monday in June]

Kyiv Day (Ukraine) [Last Sunday]

Mad Sunday (Isle of Man) [Last Sunday]

Mother’s Day (Dominican Republic, France, Sweden) [Last Sunday]

National Arbor Day (Venezuela) [Last Sunday]

Neighbor Day [8 Days before the 1st Monday in June]

Northumberland Day (UK) [Last Sunday]

Palo Dei Balestrieri (Italy) [Last Sunday]

Rural Life Sunday [Last Sunday]

Seven For Sunday [Every Sunday]

Soothing Sunday [4th Sunday of Each Month]

Spud Sunday [4th Sunday of Each Month]

Souper Sunday [Last Sunday of Each Month]

Sultry Sunday [Last Sunday of Each Month]

Sundae Sunday [Every Sunday]

Sunday Funday [Every Sunday]

World Evangelism Day [Last Sunday]

Weekly Holidays beginning May 25 (4th Full Week of May)

National African Violet Week (thru 6.1)

National Frozen Yogurt Week (thru 5.31) [4th Week]

Older Americans Mental Health Week (thru 5.31) [Last Full Week]

Week of Solidarity with the Peoples of Non Self-Governing Territories (thru 5.31)

Festivals On or Beginning May 25, 2025

Chowderfest (Waterville Valley, New Hampshire)

Coca-Cola 600 (Charlotte, North Carolina)

Indianapolis 500 Race Day (Indianapolis, Indiana)

Kraków Film Festival (Kraków, Poland) [thru 6.1]

Luton International Carnival (Luton, United Kingdom)

Slam Dunk Festival (Hatfields & Leeds, United Kingdom)

Soft Shell Festival (Crisfield, Maryland)

Vista Strawberry Festival (Vista, California)

Feast Days

Aldhelm (Christian; Saint)

St. Ambrose (Positivist; Saint)

Apollo Day (Everyday Wicca)

Bede the Venerable (Christian; Saint)

Boniface IV, Pope (Christian; Saint)

Canius (Christian; Saint)

The Cat (Muppetism)

Celebration of the Tao (The Mother of the World; Taoism)

Cookie Monster (Muppetism)

Dionysius of Milan (Christian; Saint)

Dumhade, Abbot of Iona (Christian; Saint)

Dúnchad mac Cinn Fáelad (Christian; Saint)

Gennadius of Astorga (Christian; Saint)

Gerard of Lunel (Christian; Saint)

Gregory VII, Pope (Christian; Saint)

Leo of Mantenay (a.k.a. Lye; Christian; Saint)

Madeleine Sophie Barat (Christian; Saint)

Mary Magdalene de Pazzi (Christian; Saint)

Maximus (Mauxe) of Évreux (Christian; Saint)

Mercurius (Ancient Roman Festival of Trade & Gain)

Sara-Kali’s Day (Pagan)

Stalin Day (Church of the SubGenius; Saint)

Towel Day (Pastafarian)

Urban I, Pope (Christian; Saint)

Urbanas Diena (Ancient Latvia)

Venerand (Christian; Saint)

Zenobius of Florence (Christian; Saint)

Christian Liturgical Holidays

Hanswijk Procession (Mechelen, Belgium) [Sunday before Ascension Thursday]

Rogation Sunday [5th Sunday after Easter]

Hebrew Calendar Holidays [Begins at Sundown Day Before]

Yom Yerushalayim begins (Jerusalem Day; Israel) [Iyar 28]

Lunar Calendar Holidays

Chinese: Month 4 (Xin-Si), Day 28 (Jia-Wu)

Day Pillar: Wood Horse

12-Day Officers/12 Gods: Remove Day (除 Chu) [Auspicious]

Holidays: None Known

Secular Saints Days

William Bowyer (Art)

Edward Bulwer-Lytton (Literature)

Raymond Carver (Literature)

Miles Davis (Music)

Ralph Waldo Emerson (Literature)

Eve Ensler (Literature)

Lauryn Hill (Music)

W.P. Kinsella (Literature)

Robert Ludlum (Literature)

Ian McKellen (Entertainment)

Cillian Murphy (Entertainment)

Mike Myers (Entertainment)

Vera Nazarian (Literature)

Tom Phillips (Art)

Theodore Roethke (Literature)

Stan Sakai (Art)

Igor Sikorsky (Science)

Barry Windsor-Smith (Art)

Jack Steinberger (Science)

David Wynne (Art)

Lucky & Unlucky Days

Dismal Day (Unlucky or Evil Day; Medieval Europe; 10 of 24)

Egyptian Day (Unlucky Day; Middle Ages Europe) [10 of 24]

Tomobiki (友引 Japan) [Good luck all day, except at noon.]

Premieres

Alien (Film; 1979)

Back to the Future (Film; 1985)

Back to the Future Part III (Film; 1990)

Barefoot in the Park (Film; 1967)

Barnyard Babies (Happy Harmonies Cartoon; 1935)

Battery Tunnel (NYC Tunnel; 1950)

Beyond the Great Snow Mountains, by Louis L’Amour (Novel; 1999)

The Cookie Carnival (Silly Symphonies Disney Cartoon; 1935)

The Courteous Cries of a Cricket Universal Screen Magazine Cartoon; 1917)

Daffydilly Daddy (Little Lulu Cartoon; 1945)

Davy Crockett, King of the Wild Frontier (Film; 1955)

The Day Lincoln Was Shot, by Jim Bishop (Historical Book; 1955)

Farming Fools (Oswald the Lucky Rabbit Cartoon; 1936)

Felix the Cat Cops the Prize (Pat Sullivan Comic Cartoon; 1925)

Feud with a Dude (WB MM Cartoon; 1968)

A Gander at Mother Goose (WB MM Cartoon; 1940)

The Gastronomical Me, by M.F.K. Fisher (Food Essays; 1943)

Gateway Arch dedicated (St. Louis Monument; 1968)

Hair-Raising Hare (WB MM Cartoon; 1946)

Harry of Monmouth, by A.M. Maugham (Novel; 1956)

He Ain’t Heavy, He’s My Brother, recorded by The Hollies (Song; 1969)

Hicks in Nightmareland (The Animated Grouch Chaser Cartoon; 1915)

His Last Legs (Goldwyn-Bray Comic Cartoon; 1920)

H.M.S. Pinafore, by Gilbert & Sullivan (Comic Opera; 1878)

Jasper's Minstrels (Madcap Models George Pal Cartoon; 1945)

Jesus of Montreal (Film; 1990)

The Jolly Jail Bird (Aesop's Film Fable Cartoon; 1924)

Keep on Smilin', by Wet Willie (Song; 1974)

Kiss Me, Kiss Me, Kiss Me, by The Cure (Album; 1987)

The Little Sister, by Raymond Chandler (Novel; 1949)

Men in Black 3 (Film; 2012)

Mickey’s Revue (Disney Cartoon; 1932)

Midnight Cowboy (Film; 1969)

The Miner's Daughter (Jolly Frolics UPA Cartoon; 1950)

Moonrise Kingdom (Film; 2012)

Nadja, by André Breton (Novel; 1928)

Noah Knew His Ark (Aesop's Film Fable Cartoon; 1930)

One Good Turn (Aesop's Sound Fable Cartoon; 1924)

Paprika (Anime Film; 2007)

Pearl Harbor (Film; 2001)

Piker’s Peak (WB LT Cartoon; 1957)

The Pink Blueprint (Pink Panther Cartoon; 1966)

Pink, Plunk, Plink (Pink Panther Cartoon; 1966)

Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End (Film; 2007)

Rock and Roll Heaven, by The Righteous Brothers (Song; 1974)

Safety, by Coldplay (EP: 1998)

Samstag aus Licht, by Karl Stockhausen (Opera; 1984)

See Ya Later, Gladiator (WB LT Cartoon; 1968)

The Selfish Gene, by Richard Dawkins (Science Book; 1976)

The Shell Game (Mutt & Jeff Cartoon; 1919)

Smile Pretty Say Pink (Pink Panther Cartoon; 1966)

Smoky Joe (Terrytoons Cartoon; 1945)

Solo: A Star Wars Story (Film; 2018)

Star Wars, Episode IV: A New Hope (Film; 1977)

Star Wars, Episode VI: Return of the Jedi (Film; 1983)

The Story of Cook vs. Chef (The Animated Grouch Chaser Cartoon; 1915)

Three Little Pigs (Silly Symphonies Cartoon; 1933)

Tubular Bells, by Mike Oldfield (Album; 1973)

Under My Kin, by Avril Lavigne (Album; 2004)

War Machine (Film; 2017)

Today’s Name Days

Beda, Gregor, Magdalene (Austria)

Spas, Spaska (Bulgaria)

Beda, Grgur, Urban (Croatia)

Viola (Czech Republic)

Urbanus (Denmark)

Urban, Urbo, Urve, Urves (Estonia)

Urpo (Finland)

Sophie (France)

Beda, Magdalene, Miriam, Urban (Germany)

Nefeli (Greece)

Orbán (Hungary)

Basileo, Beda, Erminio, Gregorio (Italy)

Anitra, Anšlavs, Ciemvaldis, Gunita (Latvia)

Almantas, Danutė, Urbonas (Lithuania)

Ragna, Ragnar (Norway)

Epifan, Grzegorz, Imisława, Maria Magdalena, Urban (Poland)

Ioan (România)

Urban (Slovakia)

Beda, Gregorio, Magdalena, María (Spain)

Urban (Sweden)

Celeste, Celestine (Ukraine)

Madalyn, Madeleine, Madeline, Madelyn, Madilyn, Marlee, Marleen, Marlena, Marlene, Marley (USA)

Today’s National Name Days

National Cody Day

National Enzo Day

National George Day

Today is Also…

Day of Year: Day 145 of 2025; 220 days remaining in the year

ISO Week: Day 7 of Week 21 of 2025

Celtic Tree Calendar: Huath (Hawthorn) [Day 13 of 28]

Chinese: Month 4 (Xin-Si), Day 28 (Jia-Wu)

Chinese Year of the: Snake 4723 (until February 17, 2026) [Ding-Chou]

Coptic: 17 Bashans 1741

Druid Tree Calendar: Ash (May 25-June 3) [Day 1 of 10]

Hebrew: 27 Iyar 5785

Islamic: 27 Dhu al-Qada 1446

Julian: 12 May 2025

Moon: 3%: Waning Crescent

Positivist: 5 Saint Paul (6th Month) [St. Ambrose]

Runic Half Month: Ing (Expansive Energy) [Day 12 of 15] (thru 5.28)

Season: Spring (Day 66 of 92)

SUn Calendar: 25 Magenta; Foursday [25 of 30]

Week: 4th Full Week of May

Zodiac:

Tropical (Typical) Zodiac: Gemini (Day 5 of 31)

Sidereal Zodiac: Taurus (Day 11 of 32)

Schmidt Zodiac: Cetus (Day 14 of 26)

IAU Boundaries (Current) Zodiac: Aries (Day 12 of 39)

IAU Boundaries (1977) Zodiac: Aries (Day 12 of 37)

Calendar Changes

Ash (May 25-June 3) [Druid Tree Calendar] (Month 16 of 41)

[frank-olivier]

The Future of Justice: Navigating the Intersection of AI, Judges, and Human Oversight

One of the main benefits of AI in the justice system is its ability to analyze vast amounts of data and identify patterns that human judges may not notice. For example, the use of AI in the U.S. justice system has led to a significant reduction in the number of misjudgments, as AI-powered tools were able to identify potential biases in the data and make more accurate recommendations.

However, the use of AI in the justice system also raises significant concerns about the role of human judges and the need for oversight. As AI takes on an increasingly important role in decision-making, judges must find the balance between trusting AI and exercising their own judgement. This requires a deep understanding of the technology and its limitations, as well as the ability to critically evaluate the recommendations provided by AI.

The European Union's approach to AI in justice provides a valuable framework for other countries to follow. The EU's framework emphasizes the need for human oversight and accountability and recognizes that AI is a tool that should support judges, not replace them. This approach is reflected in the EU's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which requires AI systems to be transparent, explainable and accountable.

The use of AI in the justice system also comes with its pitfalls. One of the biggest concerns is the possibility of bias in AI-generated recommendations. When AI is trained with skewed data, it can perpetuate and even reinforce existing biases, leading to unfair outcomes. For example, a study by the American Civil Liberties Union found that AI-powered facial recognition systems are more likely to misidentify people of color than white people.

To address these concerns, it is essential to develop and implement robust oversight mechanisms to ensure that AI systems are transparent, explainable and accountable. This includes conducting regular audits and testing of AI systems and providing clear guidelines and regulations for the use of AI in the justice system.

In addition to oversight mechanisms, it is also important to develop and implement education and training programs for judges and other justice professionals. This will enable them to understand the capabilities and limitations of AI, as well as the potential risks and challenges associated with its use. By providing judges with the necessary skills and knowledge, we can ensure that AI is used in a way that supports judges and enhances the fairness and accountability of the justice system.

Human Centric AI - Ethics, Regulation. and Safety (Vilnius University Faculty of Law, October 2024)

Friday, November 1, 2024

[wagecagelocations]

Here’s a refined breakdown of the negative impacts associated with the listed companies and the accusations tied to them:

Google

Google is one of the most powerful technology companies in the world, with significant influence over internet search, digital advertising, and data collection. The key negative impacts include:

垄断 (Monopoly):

Google has faced antitrust lawsuits in multiple countries, including the U.S. and EU, for allegedly using its dominant position in search and digital advertising to suppress competition.

Examples include prioritizing its own services (like Google Shopping or YouTube) in search results, disadvantaging competitors.

侵犯隐私 (Privacy Invasion):

Google has been repeatedly accused of violating user privacy through extensive data collection practices.

Issues like tracking users across websites (even in private browsing) and selling targeted ads based on sensitive user data have raised concerns.

Some governments have penalized Google for non-compliance with privacy laws, such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in the EU.

滥用权力 (Abuse of Power):

Google’s control over the digital advertising market has led to allegations of unfair practices, such as charging advertisers high fees or giving preferential treatment to its own ad platforms.

Critics argue this dominance stifles innovation and undermines smaller competitors.

Alchemy Technologies

Alchemy Technologies, a digital marketing company, has been accused of engaging in deceptive practices that manipulate user behavior:

Manipulation and Deception:

The company has been accused of misleading consumers through fake advertisements, false claims, or unethical digital marketing strategies.

Allegations include using dark patterns (design choices that trick users into actions they didn’t intend, such as subscriptions) and targeting vulnerable populations with exploitative tactics.

Erosion of Trust:

By misleading consumers and clients, companies like Alchemy Technologies contribute to widespread distrust in digital marketing practices, undermining the credibility of the broader advertising ecosystem.

Apple

Apple is known for its innovation and market leadership but has faced serious accusations regarding its business and labor practices:

垄断 (Monopoly):

Apple has been accused of monopolistic behavior, particularly regarding its App Store policies.

Developers are required to use Apple’s in-app payment system, for which Apple charges up to 30% commission, leading to accusations of anticompetitive behavior.

Legal battles, like the high-profile lawsuit with Epic Games, highlight claims that Apple unfairly limits competition within its ecosystem.

侵犯隐私 (Privacy Invasion):

Despite its public stance on user privacy, Apple has been accused of enabling surveillance, particularly in cases where it complied with government requests for user data.

Concerns about the AirTags product, which has been misused for stalking and tracking people without consent, further dent Apple’s privacy reputation.

强迫劳动 (Forced Labor):

Apple has faced allegations of forced labor within its supply chain, particularly involving factories in China and other countries.

Investigations have linked Apple’s suppliers to Uyghur forced labor in China, where workers are allegedly coerced into producing components for Apple products.

Reports of abusive working conditions, including long hours, low pay, and unsafe environments, persist, despite Apple’s claims of enforcing ethical supplier standards.

Summary of Impacts:

Google: Dominance in tech markets, privacy violations, and abuse of its powerful position have led to antitrust scrutiny and fines worldwide.

Alchemy Technologies: Manipulative and deceptive marketing practices harm consumer trust and foster unethical advertising environments.

Apple: Allegations of monopolistic practices, breaches of privacy, and labor rights violations cast a shadow over its reputation as a tech innovator.

Each company’s actions have far-reaching consequences, affecting industries, consumers, and global labor markets. Addressing these issues would require stricter regulations, transparency, and corporate accountability.

Here’s a refined breakdown of the negative impacts associated with the listed companies and the accusations tied to them:

Google

Google is one of the most powerful technology companies in the world, with significant influence over internet search, digital advertising, and data collection. The key negative impacts include:

垄断 (Monopoly):

Google has faced antitrust lawsuits in multiple countries, including the U.S. and EU, for allegedly using its dominant position in search and digital advertising to suppress competition.

Examples include prioritizing its own services (like Google Shopping or YouTube) in search results, disadvantaging competitors.

侵犯隐私 (Privacy Invasion):

Google has been repeatedly accused of violating user privacy through extensive data collection practices.

Issues like tracking users across websites (even in private browsing) and selling targeted ads based on sensitive user data have raised concerns.

Some governments have penalized Google for non-compliance with privacy laws, such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in the EU.

滥用权力 (Abuse of Power):

Google’s control over the digital advertising market has led to allegations of unfair practices, such as charging advertisers high fees or giving preferential treatment to its own ad platforms.

Critics argue this dominance stifles innovation and undermines smaller competitors.

Alchemy Technologies

Alchemy Technologies, a digital marketing company, has been accused of engaging in deceptive practices that manipulate user behavior:

Manipulation and Deception:

The company has been accused of misleading consumers through fake advertisements, false claims, or unethical digital marketing strategies.

Allegations include using dark patterns (design choices that trick users into actions they didn’t intend, such as subscriptions) and targeting vulnerable populations with exploitative tactics.

Erosion of Trust:

By misleading consumers and clients, companies like Alchemy Technologies contribute to widespread distrust in digital marketing practices, undermining the credibility of the broader advertising ecosystem.

Apple

Apple is known for its innovation and market leadership but has faced serious accusations regarding its business and labor practices:

垄断 (Monopoly):

Apple has been accused of monopolistic behavior, particularly regarding its App Store policies.

Developers are required to use Apple’s in-app payment system, for which Apple charges up to 30% commission, leading to accusations of anticompetitive behavior.

Legal battles, like the high-profile lawsuit with Epic Games, highlight claims that Apple unfairly limits competition within its ecosystem.

侵犯隐私 (Privacy Invasion):

Despite its public stance on user privacy, Apple has been accused of enabling surveillance, particularly in cases where it complied with government requests for user data.

Concerns about the AirTags product, which has been misused for stalking and tracking people without consent, further dent Apple’s privacy reputation.

强迫劳动 (Forced Labor):

Apple has faced allegations of forced labor within its supply chain, particularly involving factories in China and other countries.

Investigations have linked Apple’s suppliers to Uyghur forced labor in China, where workers are allegedly coerced into producing components for Apple products.

Reports of abusive working conditions, including long hours, low pay, and unsafe environments, persist, despite Apple’s claims of enforcing ethical supplier standards.

Summary of Impacts:

Google: Dominance in tech markets, privacy violations, and abuse of its powerful position have led to antitrust scrutiny and fines worldwide.

Alchemy Technologies: Manipulative and deceptive marketing practices harm consumer trust and foster unethical advertising environments.

Apple: Allegations of monopolistic practices, breaches of privacy, and labor rights violations cast a shadow over its reputation as a tech innovator.

Each company’s actions have far-reaching consequences, affecting industries, consumers, and global labor markets. Addressing these issues would require stricter regulations, transparency, and corporate accountability.

https://chatgpt.com/share/6752f369-7f9c-800c-8ef8-c927a0069dc6

[saintmeghanmarkle]

Because Its The Law - Data Protection Laws: Understanding the Royal Familys Silence on Surrogacy by u/Oakthrees

Because… It’s The Law - Data Protection Laws: Understanding the Royal Family’s Silence on Surrogacy The persistent speculation about why the Royal Family hasn't publicly disclosed whether Meghan used a surrogate is rooted in a fundamental misunderstanding of data protection laws. These laws, notably the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in the EU and the UK's Data Protection Act 2018, serve as robust shields for personal and private information. They're especially stringent when it comes to sensitive personal data, which unequivocally includes health-related details.Applying this to the British royal family, suppose a family member chose surrogacy over natural childbirth. Such a choice is undeniably sensitive personal data. Disclosing it without explicit consent is not just a breach of etiquette; it's a blatant violation of these stringent data protection laws. These laws are built on pillars of lawfulness, fairness, and transparency in handling personal data, underscoring an individual's right to privacy and autonomy over their personal information.Turning to the media's role, their interest in the royals doesn't grant them a carte blanche to invade personal privacy. Any leak of such intimate details by a royal family member to the press would be a clear transgression of these legal frameworks.That's why you'll never hear this from the royal family, and why responsible news outlets wouldn't dare to publish it. This isn't just about respecting privacy; it's about adhering to laws that guard our most personal information. post link: https://ift.tt/ALVCfoa author: Oakthrees submitted: December 14, 2023 at 02:56AM via SaintMeghanMarkle on Reddit

[ncs-swiss]

Formal Communiqué From: European Union To: Swiss National Council Subject: Switzerland’s Approach to EU Accession and Adherence to EU Legal Frameworks

Date: December 11, 2024

Honourable Members of the National Council of Switzerland,

The European Union (EU) recognizes Switzerland as a valued partner and close neighbor with a long-standing tradition of collaboration, mutual respect, and shared values. Your continued interest in closer association with the EU is a testament to our intertwined histories and economic interdependence.

However, the European Union wishes to express its unequivocal position regarding the foundational principles that underpin accession and integration into our union. The EU’s legal and regulatory framework, including cornerstone legislation such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), reflects a unified vision of governance, economic cooperation, and respect for fundamental rights that all member states adhere to without reservation.

The EU has observed certain discussions and proposals from Swiss policymakers suggesting an intent to selectively adopt or alter key elements of EU law to accommodate domestic preferences. While the EU appreciates the unique characteristics of each member state and recognizes the importance of national contexts, selective application or “cherry-picking” of laws undermines the integrity and coherence of our Union.

Accession to the EU necessitates full alignment with the EU acquis—the body of rights and obligations binding all member states. Laws such as the GDPR are not merely administrative or sectoral policies but are essential to the single market, ensuring trust, security, and competitiveness in an increasingly digital world. Unilateral deviations from such laws would compromise the principles of equality and fairness that underpin the Union.

In light of this, the European Union wishes to make clear that: 1. Priority for Accession: Switzerland will not be afforded priority or accelerated pathways for EU accession if it seeks to adopt a selective or modified approach to EU laws. The EU’s legal framework must be embraced in its entirety, ensuring a level playing field for all member states. 2. Negotiation Preconditions: Any discussions on accession or deeper integration will be contingent on Switzerland’s demonstrated commitment to aligning fully with EU legislation, including GDPR, without unilateral alterations. 3. Institutional Framework: Switzerland must accept the jurisdiction of EU bodies, including the European Court of Justice, in matters of legal interpretation and dispute resolution relating to EU law.

The EU remains open to dialogue and is committed to fostering a constructive partnership. However, we urge the Swiss National Council to align its approach with the principles of mutual trust and shared responsibility that define EU membership.

We look forward to continued cooperation and hope for meaningful progress in discussions that honor the spirit of unity and collective purpose.

Yours sincerely,

Mr. Petros Mavromichalis Ambassador of the European Union to Switzerland European Union Headquarters

[zeenimf]

excuse me what

We detect that you are in one of the member countries of the UK/EU/EEA, which is now subject to the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Unfortunately, a tracking-free version of our full website is currently unavailable in these countries.

okay bye i guess

[beardedmrbean]

ChatGPT, the artificial intelligence-powered chatbot, breaches rules on data protection, an Italian watchdog says.

An inquiry by Italy's Data Protection Authority (DPA) found data privacy violations, which the BBC understands are related to collecting personal data and age protections.

The chatbot relies on being fed large amounts of data from the internet.

ChatGPT's maker OpenAI has 30 days to respond with its defence. The BBC has contacted OpenAI for comment.

Italy has taken a firm stance on data protection when it comes to ChatGPT.

It was the first Western country to block the product in March 2023, citing privacy concerns.

ChatGPT was reinstated around four weeks later, after stating it had successfully "addressed or clarified" the issues raised by the DPA.

Italy's DPA launched a "fact-finding activity" at the time, which it says has now found data privacy violations.

In a statement, the DPA said it "concluded that the available evidence pointed to the existence of breaches of the provisions contained in the EU GDPR [General Data Protection Regulation]".

They are related to mass collection of users' data which is then used to train the algorithm.

The regulator is also concerned that younger users may be exposed to inappropriate content generated by the chatbot.

Under the EU's GDPR law, firms which break the rules can be fined up to 4% of the company's global turnover.

Italy's DPA works alongside the European Union's European Data Protection Board - which set up a special task force to monitor ChatGPT in April 2023.

At the time of ChatGPT's reinstatement in Italy in April 2023, the Italian regulator told the BBC that it "welcomed the measures OpenAI implemented" but called for even more compliance.

In particular, a spokesperson said, it wanted more action around "implementing an age verification system and planning and conducting an information campaign to inform Italians of what happened as well as of their right to opt-out from the processing of their personal data for training algorithms".

An OpenAI spokesperson said at the time that it would continue talks with the regulator.

OpenAI has close links with tech giant Microsoft, which has invested billions of dollars into the company.

Microsoft has integrated AI into its Bing search engine, as well as its Office 365 apps such as Word, Teams and Outlook.

[taikeero-lecoredier]

Chat control email script (english)

Subject line: "2022/0155(COD)

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing to express my grave concerns regarding the proposed introduction of "Chat Control,", also known as CSAM regulation This measure poses a serious threat to the privacy and fundamental rights of all EU citizens and stands in stark contradiction to the core principles that the European Union seeks to uphold.

Violation of Fundamental Rights

The proposed Chat Control contravenes Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which guarantee the right to respect for private and family life and the protection of personal data. The indiscriminate surveillance of private messages without specific suspicion or cause directly violates these fundamental rights. Contradiction to the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) sets out stringent rules for the processing of personal data. The proposed indiscriminate surveillance and scanning of private messages before end-to-end encryption is fundamentally incompatible with the principles of data minimization and purpose limitation enshrined in the GDPR. Specifically, Articles 5 and 6 of the GDPR, which govern the lawfulness and principles of data processing, would be violated by the introduction of such measures.

Technical and Ethical Concerns The implementation of Client-Side Scanning (CSS) on devices means that all messages and files are scanned on the user's device before being encrypted and sent. This effectively nullifies the protection offered by end-to-end encryption and opens the door to misuse and additional security vulnerabilities. Moreover, the technical capability to scan such content could be exploited by malicious actors to circumvent or by taking advantage of surveillance mechanisms Threat to Freedom of Expression and Trust in Digital Communication

Such far-reaching surveillance measures endanger not only privacy but also freedom of expression. The knowledge that their private messages are being scanned and monitored could significantly restrict individuals' willingness to freely express themselves. Additionally, trust in digital communication platforms would be severely undermined.

Call to Action

I urge you to take a strong stance against this disproportionate and unlawful measure. The privacy and digital rights of EU citizens must be safeguarded. It is imperative that we protect our fundamental rights and ensure transparency in the decision-making processes of our leaders.

Furthermore, given the current war happening in Ukraine, installing back doors in private communications would create more security vulnerabilities that Russia could exploit in order to launch cyber attacks within Europe and steal essential data. American officials have been recommending their citizens to use encrypted messaging following the multiple cyber attacks that targeted 8 telecom providers, including Verizon according to this article : https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/security/us-officials-urge-americans-use-encrypted-apps-cyberattack-rcna182694

For more detailed information on the Chat Control proposal and its implications, please refer to the following resource: https://edri.org/our-work/dutch-decision-puts-brakes-on-chat-control/

Thank you for your attention to this critical matter.

Sincerely,

[Name]

Art. 10 GG , Art. 8 & 11 EU Charta , Art. 8 EMRK ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

( This is the kind of arguments you can use when contacting your officials. I don't have a phone script ready yet,but you should familiarize yourself with your meps / prime ministers and tell them to keep opposing Chat Control,no matter what country you are in. It's best that you translate this script in your own language when contacting your officials and reword some parts so it doesnt sound repetitive if they are going to receive similar emails of that nature. )

Find your meps : https://www.europarl.europa.eu/meps/en/search/advanced?

If anyone knows a site where all the EU prime ministers are listed, let me know ! If you have no clue what im takling about,please check this post : https://www.tumblr.com/taikeero-lecoredier/769688553496215552/okayso-good-news-chat-control-still-didnt?source=share

[nickgerlich]

Prying Apart The Grip

The iPhone was introduced in July 2007. It’s hard to believe we are coming up on the 17th anniversary of what is now a necessary device—be it Apple or a competitor—for daily living. Apple ushered in a whole new way of life, merging phone, camera, and music player into one device.

Of course, those three were just the tip of the iceberg, and developers wanted a way to get their cool new web-based applications onto those phones. So Apple wisely opened the App Store in 2008. While the number of apps peaked at 2.2 million in 2017, it has settled into a comfortable groove at 1.8 million, thanks to Apple sifting through the mess and deleting some older apps that no longer worked.

But buried in the details of the App Store agreement that developers had to sign with Apple—who vetted each app for safety and security—was some fine print: Every in-app sale would be divided 70/30 between the developer and Apple. Basically, there was and still is a 30% Apple tax just for playing, at least in the US. Every time a user buys something in an app, then Apple gets a healthy chunk of it.

But that is now changing in Europe, where the EU has become the tail that wags the dog.

Remember all those Cookies boxes we have to check off on virtually every website we visit? We can thank the EU and their GDPR, which stands for General Data Protection Regulation. It was easier for everyone to just make it the global standard, even if they are annoying.

And then there was Apple’s announcement last year that all new phones going forward would feature a USB-C connector, instead of the Lightning port. This too was in response to the EU mandating that all phones must have the same connector, and rather than have two global systems, Apple sided with the EU. Admittedly, it does simplify things for everyone, except for Apple users during this transition period. Legacy phone users will have a bunch of obsolete connectors real soon when they upgrade.

The third wave of EU influence just passed, and it is the opening up of the App Store to competitors who wish to have their own stores, thus bypassing the Apple ecosystem. Furthermore, it marks what will be the end of that 30% Apple tax, something that Spotify has been dreaming about ever since it wanted to upsell users with its audio books program. They are pretty happy right now.

Apple, of course, is concerned, arguing that third-party app stores may not pass muster in terms of safety and security, and users could be at risk. Point well taken. I’m betting they are more concerned about losing their revenue sharing program, though.

But for now, this is only going to happen in Europe, but you can bet that US regulators will be watching closely. It could just as easily be mandated here. Apple has enjoyed a tightly-held monopoly in many aspects of its phones, ceding only accessory items to third-party makers. You know. Things like connector cords and dongles that allow you to connect to your laptop all the things that were once standard on a MacBookPro.

Here in the US, we are not accustomed to the heavy hand of government telling companies how to run their business, and if someone wants to take the chance of using proprietary connectors and being the only source of mobile apps, then so be it. The risk is on them.

In the case of Apple, though, this has played out very well for them. It all depends on how the FTC feels about such monopoly power. Apple has 58% share of smartphones in the US, with the remainder scattered across the Android platform. That’s power. If the US were to follow the EU regarding the App Store, it would at least loosen some of the grip this company has on our daily lives.

Maybe that's not such a bad idea, and this coming from a guy who is very laissez faire in worldview. As much as I am an Apple fanboy, with many phones, tablets, and computers through the years, I often feel like Apple is guilty of abusing its position by using customers as product testers, and forcing us to buy things we really don’t want, like those silly dongles so I can read a memory stick or SD card.

Besides, I feel for Spotify on this one, because it has the potential to pose a formidable threat to Audible in the audio book world, except that for now Apple will always have its hand out. Audible, of course, is an Amazon property, and dodges the Apple tax.

Furthermore, 17 years is a long time to have such a death grip on a market. I’m good with following the EU’s lead on this, because in the end it will likely be good for consumers. And isn’t that what it’s all about?

Dr “iReckon” Gerlich

Audio Blog

[mariacallous]

Elon Musk is a ‘promoter of evil,’ EU rule-of-law chief says

BRUSSELS — Elon Musk, unlike other tech bosses, "is not able to recognize good and evil,” a European Union top official said Wednesday.

The multibillionaire tech mogul and boss of X, Tesla and SpaceX is amplifying hatred, outgoing European Commission Vice President Věra Jourová told POLITICO in an interview, calling him a “promoter of evil.”

Musk has been on a collision course with European officials, fighting regulators and governments on multiple fronts. The tech mogul bought Twitter in April 2022, rebranding it as X shortly after, and he has attracted criticism for his management of the platform, with European politicians and civil society saying he has allowed hate speech to fester on the site.

“We started to relativize evil, and he's helping it proactively. He's the promoter of evil,” Jourová said.

The Czech politician, who was the EU’s justice chief from 2014-2019 and has been in charge of “values and transparency” since 2019, has had regular contact with many of the world’s largest technology companies over the last decade on issues like privacy, disinformation and content moderation. 

Big tech companies have “monstrous power in their hands,” Jourová said. “I'm really scared by digital platforms in bad hands."

X is “the main hub for spreading antisemitism now,” Jourová said, adding that she warned ministers from EU capitals on Tuesday to be vigilant to the possibility of online antisemitism spilling over into the real world. 

“Now we are in the situation where the member states’ law enforcement powers have to protect the people who are under threat, under physical threat,” she said. “This is what I mean ... This new chapter, new intensity of antisemitism, where we don't see sufficient action from the side of the platforms.”

Jourová has never met Musk in person, but said that “even without this personal meeting, I would say that out of all the bosses I met, he is the only one who is not able to recognize good and evil.” 

The EU’s former internal market chief Thierry Breton did meet Musk in California in 2022, and since clashed with him publicly over Musk’s approach to online content moderation. 

X did not respond to a request for comment.

Regulation vs. innovation

Jourová also dismissed the increasingly popular narrative that Brussels' overregulation has stifled tech innovation.

The EU passed a raft of digital legislation over the last five years, leading some of the world’s largest technology companies to argue that they cannot launch AI tools and other innovative products in the bloc because they don’t know how the new laws work together or how they will be enforced. 

But innovation for innovation’s sake is not necessarily desirable, Jourová said: “We have to be sure that the innovations are developed to do good to people.”

She said she wondered why innovation was typically "described as something absolutely good, [and] regulations as something which is bad … It's not black and white."

Big tech companies’ vast profits should not be at the expense of Europeans, Jourová said — even if that means product-launch delays. “Nobody says that Google and others cannot introduce new technologies in Europe. Maybe, one, two months, half a year later than somewhere else, but we want to be sure,” she said. 

Jourová led work on the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), a landmark privacy regime that went into force in 2018 and remains one of the EU’s most famous — and infamous — laws. 

Though the EU recently passed the Artificial Intelligence Act, the Digital Services Act and the Digital Markets Act, the GDPR often remains the main target of tech companies' ire, particularly because of how it is interpreted. The question of whether the law will need to be changed in the next five years is a key issue for incoming Commission tech chief Henna Virkkunen, Jourová said. 

“I think in [terms of] GDPR, we will have to look again at how to better enforce under the principle of one continent, one law,” she said. 

Jourová, who is leaving Brussels after 10 years at the Berlaymont, joked that she was returning to Prague as a “dissident,” given she left her own ANO party, which has turned more illiberal under former Czech Prime Minister Andrej Babiš. 

The return of the Euroskeptic Babiš, who is currently leading the polls ahead of next year's Czech election, would strengthen the illiberal forces in the EU, given Babiš’ ties to Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán. 

Jourová dismissed rumors that she would start her own political movement to take on her former boss. Instead, she will return to her alma mater, Charles University in Prague, in a management and teaching role.