@pperrin I imagine the differences in the law and the enforcement will be rather dramatic. Trying to control the internet like that is just plain impossible. They'd have to prosecute basically everyone and block just about every website. It's a completely disproportionate amount of effort to justify actually trying it considering what the return would be.
@OTheB They can selectively prosecute anyone who actually makes any impact. That's how most draconian laws get used.
But the UK can still avoid it.
@pperrin We *can* avoid it, but going that way wouldn't be worth it. Would make a lot more sense to stay, keep a functioning economy and any hope of ending osterity, and then fight to help *all* of the EU get out of this nonsense.
@OTheB Your view maybe 'not worth it' - but it is just one tiny bit of the lamps going out over europe under the commissions control. New businesses blocked so the established big boys can keep coining it and giving the politicians a slice.
@pperrin True, which is why we should be doing all we can to *help* stop that, rather than running off saying "well our entire country is fucked but at least we're not subject to Articles 11 and 13!"
@OTheB Err... under the EU all 28 member states countries are f*cked... (Ok, except Germany economically maybe) - hadn't you noticed?
@pperrin Articles 11 and 13 can be revoked with effort. Us running off, leaving the single market, losing freedom of movement, breaking the good Friday agreement, and losing the protections (from the EU no less) that keep our human rights however... *little* bit harder to undo.
@OTheB If they could really be revoked they'd never have been passed. Everything went into getting them stopped - what do you think could have been done that wasn't?
@pea non-commercial? If you put a copyright image/sound on a personal youtube video, youtube will monitize it for the copyright holder. I assume this is the EU's model (youtube and its copyright mates probably drafted a good part of the legislation!)
It takes a few years for all member states to implement the law. That's how the EU works: member states are independent, but have to implement all directives.
@frank87 And you need eggs to make an omelette, but that isn't relevant to what I tooted either...
The commission want this law, it has been passed by the EU, it is heading for all member states... yes.
Now what does this mean for people hosting mastodon instances?
@frank87 On a more general note, it is obscene that one is expected to 'keep track of the law'. Law has very, very little reason to ever change. But once you create professional law-makers, they find reasons to add new law to everything.
A man (male or female) should never be subject to a law they can't have been expected to have been aware of and read. The Average man (once adult) has about an hour a year to read up on new laws - to create more than that is inhumane.
@pperrin Well dead, not immediately. But it will become dangerous to host instances. Some will move underground or out of #EU. Probably a lot of cat&mouse stuff going on for a long time. It will probably hinder mass-adoption.
But maybe I'm wrong, and is federating lots of small instances just the way for escaping #art13
@AstaMcCarthy I understand that TOR is used by state security services and relies on the 'noise' of common users to help hide their communications. So they need the public darknet users to hide the state ones. If true the state cannot afford to shut down the darknet...
Do you know if this is still true (or ever was??).
@pperrin I don't have details about that. I do know that USA government is sponsoring TOR: https://2019.www.torproject.org/about/sponsors.html.en
I also deem it likely that a lot of exit nodes are run by secrete services to gather intel.
This Mastodon instance is for people interested in technology. Discussions aren't limited to technology, because tech folks shouldn't be limited to technology either!