Okay, how many of you lot 
ed this because they thought it was about Viktor OrbĂĄn?
Because 9 s on this thread is, like, Woodstock.
I just added a heart right now, after reading it. Any right-wing person who steps down is okay with me. 
I worry where this is inevitably heading and nobody wants harmful content** but iâd like it explained to me how the EU squares the circle of âmaking platforms responsible for hosted contentâ but also âto address the dominance of big players such as Google and Facebookâ without said tech giants getting further entrenched into dominance because only they have the resources available to employ teams of moderators and automated censorware. They would need the kind of censorware that would make Content ID modest - a robo-judge that is opaque, overblocks with extreme prejudice and estimated to have handled 122,500,000 claims just in 2017.
**Whatever that is, once you start moving away from the extremes and start getting to the subjective cases.
ETA: The BBC have a very simplistic take on things sometimes so i feel a little more positive after reading EFFâs take on the draft proposal. The devil remains in the details though as they say and itâs a shame thereâs nothing about interop in there.
ETA2: However, the online harms white paper the UK government has released does not leave me so hopeful. At first glance there seems to be too much scope for misuse and let history be the judge of the governmentâs badly thought through internet policies that are just abandoned (age verification) or rammed through parliament with nary a debate (investigatory powers act).
Going after GoogleâŚagain:
What could possibly go wrong with a Japanese-German alliance?
Further to that, I found this neat little gallery of cartoons from the perspective of the Thai pro-democracy movement.
Read the article- itâs a catalogue of murderous incompetence.
US Department of Homeland Security warns American business not to use Chinese tech or let data behind the Great Firewall
The United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has published a guide to the terrifying risks that businesses will expose themselves to if they use tech created in the Peoplesâ Republic of China (PRC) or engage in any business activity with the Middle Kingdom.
The fifteen-page âData Security Business Advisoryâ [PDF] opens by warning âBusinesses expose themselves and their customers to heightened risk when they share sensitive data with firms located in the PRC, or use equipment and software developed by firms with an ownership nexus in the PRC.â
[âŚ]
Couldnât agree more.
Sent from my iPad.
Oh, but that iPad was created1) in America!
1) Using IP held by a subsidiary in a tax haven. And built in China. With parts from all over Asia and resources from all over the world. May contain ethical dodgy labour, parts, material and/or practices. But totally an American product proudly made by an American company. Except for tax purposes.
You know that in some countries the argument is whether you can let sensitive personal data pass through an American server? The general consensus is no. Itâs not ethical and the data protection falls far short of what is legal.
Iâve been seeking assurances and contracts from UK providers for a couple of years now for data processing agreements in a no deal Brexit scenario. Because the general consensus there is also that it will be illegal to have sensitive data processed there.
Where in the world is Jack Ma? Alibaba tycoon not seen since October after slamming Chinese government
Former CEO and founder of Chinese e-commerce giant Alibaba Jack Ma has vanished from public view, fueling fears Beijing is punishing the cloud mogul for speaking out against the Chinese government.
[âŚ]
