wwtrv

Care to explain? Besides the accidental 5 of course.

You did include both of these in the same comment, though:

> Would this also ban spam filters? Fraud convictions? > But these are straw men

Anyway, at least in the US (but I also assume similar provisions in other countries as well) the 5th amendment generally only applies to the government, not companies and private individuals (in a way you deciding to "censor" someone is an expression of your free speech).

In reality they have a somewhat limited say in who the Commission president is going to back and almost no influence on its members. Compared to most national parliaments it's extremely weak and quite pointless.

It's pretty much a joke, it can't propose any legislation since it doesen't really control the "EU government". The could be a majority in the EU parliament that would support passing specific legislation and they couldn't do anything about that, not even have an actual vote.

> She was appointed by the EU parliament

IMHO that would be perfectly fine on its own (or do you think that any parliamentary state is not a "real democracy"?).

But the problem is that she was appointed by the Council/National governments and the parliament just rubber-stamped their pick. If the relationship between the Parliament and Commission were the same as between the parliaments and governments of other countries it would be perfectly fine.

> "real president"

You clearly don't speak French? What's a "real president" anyway?

Also if we go that route you do know that the e.g. German, Italian, Greek etc. "presidents" are also not elected directly?

> The role you're talking about is more like that of the Speaker of the House in the US or the UK. Both are elected by members of the chamber, not a popular vote.

Not really. The commission president is certainly (not even remotely) the equivalent of the Speaker in the British parliament (maybe a slightly closer in the US).

Not even Prime Minister would be a real equivalent since the commission isn't appointed by the parliament and it has relative very little say in what the commission does. In certain ways it's not fundamentally that different from some of the pseudo-democratic European states in the 1800s where the job of parliament was only to rubber stamp the laws written by the appointed government (of course there is no equivalent of the King/Emperor).

Really? Some cartel operatives believe their actions are justified for some greater good? Well unless you count filling your own pockets a "greater good" then they are objectively extremely deranged and delusional which possibly makes them even more dangerous.

> relies on the perspective of the participant though > Parents point is that ‘bad’ is a matter of perspective, and that right or wrong,

Not really, though. Some things are just 'bad' (you or the perpetrator might not agree but that doesen't change that fact).

> They'll buy a $20 blender that will die in a year rather than the $100 blender that will last a lifetime.

One problem for consumers is that often it's very hard to tell which is which. There is no guarantee that a $60 item won't just be overpriced garbage which is as bad (or worse if they spent much of that money on unnecessarily complex features that reduce reliability) as the $20 one, so always picking the cheaper item that superficially might seem good enough is not necessarily irrational.

(of course this doesen't necessarily apply to all brands yet)

The idea is (well according to France at least) that they'll monitor those chats and report the suspected "criminals" to the government.

> Is there a check box to state that you are a criminal when you message someone

I assume they'd could check for specific keywords or use perceptual hashing for images etc.

And your point is? Generally only unelected officials are allowed to formulate or propose EU policy (the EU "parliament" is only there for rubber stamping it) how is that similar to most countries?

> Telegram is end-to-end encrypted in private chats

Not by default (unlike the other services you've mentioned )?

Well in Telegram's case the idea is that they knowingly provide taxi services to those criminals and do supposedly nothing when it's reported to them because they are "too small" to moderate everything

> Unelected officials = experts

What? Not in the commission. It's a 100% politically appointed body made up of politicians, it's just not elected.

Also even on the lower levels being an "expert" EU apparatchik has absolutely nothing to do with dedicated your life to science.

In any case it's a deeply flawed system, minimum oversight and a lot of money to spend/waste can't ever lead anywhere good.

And battery life with most laptops (even the Framework) is pretty horrible on Linux compared to Windows without excessive tweaking (and even then).