Slashdot Mirror
EU To Give Internet Firms 1 Hour To Remove Extremist Content (go.com)
European authorities are planning to slap internet companies like Google, Twitter and Facebook with big fines if they don't take down extremist content within one hour. From a report: European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker said in a speech Wednesday that the Commission is proposing the new rules as part of efforts to step up the bloc's security. He said that removing material within an hour is important because it's "the critical window in which the greatest damage is done." The EU's executive body said "propaganda that prepares, incites or glorifies acts of terrorism" must be taken offline. Content would be flagged up by national authorities, who would issue removal orders to the internet companies hosting it. Those companies would be given one hour to delete it. The proposal, which still needs approval from EU lawmakers and member states, would be a departure for the EU, which until now has allowed online companies to a take a voluntary approach to battling extremist content. The one-hour rule was among a series of recommendations the Commission made in March to fight the spread of extremist content online.
Yeah, good luck with that!
Why not just require companies to allow EU officials to log in and delete content they don't approve of themselves?
Go one better. Allow citizens to flag content as offensive and if the annointed EU officials don't log in and delete it within an hour, sentence them to shubbery hunts.
Of Europe.
"propaganda that prepares, incites or glorifies acts of terrorism" I guess most of the news will have to be taken down. This seems really easy to abuse. But Europe has a narrower version of free speech, so it's really no surprise.
And the same people that are weeping over the first being put to the flame in Sagan's fictitious narrative are literally lighting it on fire at the same time.
Yeah, that is what I thought.
Personally I think it is insane that a search engine or indexing company should be in any way responsible for pointing to content that is publicly available on the Internet. I can see take down orders to ISPs hosting content (assuming the content is illegal in the jurisdiction where the servers are), but going after people telling you where the content exists is scary.
It's a slippery slope and not that far from making the statement "If you go to the library, you can learn out to build a bomb" illegal.
They can't define "extremist content", but it's banned.
2 much better laws, with the same lack of logic:
1) Everything bad is banned.
2) Everything good is required.
"He said that removing material within an hour is important because it's "the critical window in which the greatest damage is done...Content would be flagged up by national authorities, who would issue removal orders to the internet companies hosting it. Those companies would be given one hour to delete it."
So the hour after national authorities find it is this critical window? Everything before that is fine? The greatest damage is only done after the national authorities have flagged it?
How long until the Commission defines extremism as views that do not support the EU
Those that rely on censorship have low belief in their standings
If they keep going like this with those completely unreasonable demands and articles, basically all websites will block the EU countries completely.
It sounds good, but who defines "extremist content" or worse "incites acts of terrorism". It might be clear to you and me what this would be, but how about if you don't agree with what people say who are in control of this definition? You don't think a huge government entity will use it's power to remove content against it's view or agenda? Especially since in their point of view it could "incite acts of terrorism". How about the term "hate speach"? Say something someone doesn't like and it's "hate".
I hope people wake up soon. Rarely do rights get given back by a government body. They usually have to be ripped from their cold dead hands.
EU To Give Internet Firms 1 Hour To Remove Extremist Content
Well, time to fire up the military and give then 2 years to remove extremist censors in government.
You weren't freed from Nazis so 60 years later neo-dictators could censor free people.
The problem never has been the content of speech, but rather the existence of powers a wannabe dictator uses to harm political enemies.
These include various forms of censorship both direct and indirect, investigating political enemies or threatening to, or their supporters, or outright arresting them, amd so on.
This is not something that can be safely wielded by democracy, much less a bare simple majority, a low bar for a charismatic leader to hop.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
I see: 32-hour workweek, 1-hour response time. That's a lot of employees.
Also: small businesses and startups need not exist.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Who now decides what is considered bad? Is demanding that people go out and vote against a sitting politician bad? Is anything posted by Fox News now bad? Is posting or linking to the factually incorrect and incendiary statements from President Trump now grounds for fines? We only want you to post good things, but now who gets to decide what is bad?
And since rerouting around damage is a feature that was part of the Internet concept from the getgo, then that would mean the Internt is operating as intended.
This space unintentionally left blank.
Why bother hacking anything anymore, when laws mandate companies provide channels to accomplish what it would otherwise take a lot of hacking to do?
I can see this insta-remove system being really abused for a lot of valid content. Going to be interesting to watch them try to live in the world they are creating.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
New tactic: hack someones site and load it with extremism then tip off the authorities.
And to think, that as an American, I was feeling sorry for myself. Never again. I should have known, no matter how crazy America gets, Europe will always be worse. That doesn't mean I excuse or accept how hard we try to fuck ourselves, but I tell you this: the grass isn't greener on the other side of the fence. For all its blemishes .. America, fuck yeah!!! Our First Amendment will always make you people look like backwards cavemen.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
I'll give it a month (or so) before it's all declared null-and-void.
Cool, "Inquisition 2.0"
Any religious content from any religion that espouses any kind of violence, banned.
The Koran and Old Testament call for murder of others on religious principles. Ban all that. Should be fun.
The EU doesn't have a content problem, they have a culture problem - they are infested by cultures prone to irrationality inspired by magical thinking. It doesn't matter what is banned - irrational creatures will continue to be irrational.
"Every time I see an adult on a bicycle, I no longer despair for the future of the human race." - H. G. Wells
Look at who the extremists are now.
The only way to realistically do this is to vet every posting manually that is even slightly suspicious beforehand. That is censorship, nothing else.
This is a specific kind of evil that especially the Germans are into (but lovers of authoritarianism everywhere can relate). Germany has an absolute "no censorship" in its constitution that cannot be changed. But because they love censorship so much, they are now going this route.
Of course, nobody even considers what the problem with censorship (and authoritarianism) is, just like the last few authoritarian catastrophes had never happened. Evil at work and, as usual, the road to hell is plastered with good intentions.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
This rule would make it impossible for any small company to maintain any kind of interactive presence on the internet. You would need staff working 24x7 just to watch for this. That would be 5 full time employees (7 in France). Popular sites won't have a chance. Hell I could be malicious and take down a site by posting hate on it.
This is a case of the fix being worse than the problem. (or maybe the problem is control freak politicians)
So, punish people for seeking knowledge? Not everyone who views extremist content is themselves an extremist, you know.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
The Great Library was burned because the information challenged the authority of those in power, to the savages burned it.
The Internet, on the other hand, is being burned by savages who weild censorship in exchange for votes so political opponents cannot challenge their power.
As you can clearly see, there is an enormous difference as to why those savages in power are burning their various great libraries.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Consider Tommy Robinson in England who was giving a live report on the street outside the trial of a muslim rape gang was taking place. He was arrested, tried, and put in prison for 13 months all in the span of a few hours, just for reporting from the street. No hate. No incitement. Just telling the truth. Thanks to an international outcry, he was released some weeks later. The Europeans are out of control, and living in a dark place where freedom and human rights can not be found. Freedom of speech has been long gone from Europe.
The countries the AC has listed are governed by right-wring governments, one of them more or less a dictatorship, and all of them take down terrorist content and incitements to violence as fast as they can right now, without the need of any EU directive. Turkey has put tens of thousands of citizens into prison under vague terrorist accusations and there are currently, as we speak, EU actions against Hungary and Poland, because their governments have stifled the press and interfered with the judicial system. Last but not least, the UK has enacted extensive internet surveillance laws and is known to barely protect journalists. In a nutshell, these countries belong to those within the EU that are for more censorship, not against it.
So yeah, the AC's post makes zero sense., even if some US Slashdot mods don't understand that.
The Stasi, GeStaPo and their present-day successors applaud your great idea!
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Fair's fair. Content flagged up by national authorities could be counternoticed by the posters, who would issue summons to the national authorities into national courts. Those national authorities would be given one hour to appear to defend the removal order.
Of course, what fun is it to issue ridiculously short time periods to act if you yourself are made subject to them.
In May 2018, Robinson was sentenced to 13 months' imprisonment for contempt of court after publishing a Facebook Live video of defendants entering a law court, contrary to a court order to prevent reporting those trials while proceedings are ongoing.
Not obeying a court order will get you sentenced in every single country on earth.
we at least had cheap Vodka.
sudo rm -r -f --no-preserve-root /
No need to wonder. The U.S has already proven this is how it goes, and the E.U. is WAY more "progressive" than the United States.
Lawmakers once again proving they have no farking clue how the internet works.
So whenever new inane and deranged ramblings from people like Nikki Haley or John Bolton are reported in the news, EU sites will be forced to take them down? Not too bad an idea but the censorship infrastructure required is nuts anyway. 2/10 I am sure you will have no problem with postings from the likes militant progressives that want to organize their violent protests. Or the likes of Maxine Waters who wants her supporters to harass, confront, and attack Trump supporters and members of the Trump administration in public. Yea, that's right. Attack. That is violence. But being the hypocrite piece of shit you are, I am sure you have no problem with her. fuck off bigot
Anonymous comments are as pathetic as the anonymous "sources" that contaminate gutless journalism from the New York Time
We just cut off the EU as a whole to the internet? just do a ip range ban. if they want to censor the interent as bad as they want then no internet for them? or lest nothing thats from the out side of the EU. This would suck for lots and lots of innocent people yes, I know.
It gives them a mandate to remove anything that they think might be likely to get flagged, which means they can remove all the rough stuff and leave nothing but kitty pictures, banal status updates, and pornography.
They can take a look at any content that is off-mainstream and say, "This is likely to generate a 1-hour ban, so we're just going to remove it in advance and kick out the perpetrators," which leaves them with what they have always wanted, which are "safe spaces" where people can project their egos all over the internet without consequences.
Someone from the FANG companies probably spread around a few million of those Zuckbucks to ensure that the EU would go down this ill-advised path. Nothing says that your civilization is failing quite like having to suppress a whole lot of information related to dissent.
At first, they tell us they will crack down on terrorists... but soon, this will expand to include anyone who is a critic of the current System whose views might lead to a need to physically resist the regime. It always does.
Alternative Right.
Same with people like Maxine Waters who she wants her followers to harass, confront, and attack conservatives in public. Or Louis Farrakhan who hates jews. Or Al Sharpton who can be blamed for inciting the Crown Heights riots. Just to name a few. They will not be censored, but I am sure every conservative will be.
Anonymous comments are as pathetic as the anonymous "sources" that contaminate gutless journalism from the New York Time
is not a manual book.
But Europe has a narrower version of free speech, so it's really no surprise.
Almost as un-surprising as USA's extreme phobia of uncovered nipples.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Attempting to hide behind the incorrect use of logical fallacies shows you not only don't understand fallacies, but the initial post your defending is pretty much shit (as is yours). Sorry your such a fucking idiot.
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
And oh yes, I realize how many ways you can make fun of us. But we [still] have this.
And here, we still have "display of titties" not being considered as a terrorist act. To each his own.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Between this and the copyright/link tax shit, the EU is basically begging to be cut off from the rest of the internet. You fucking EU citizens under 50 need to start voting these insane morons out.
Whats the material thats going to get removed?
Jokes and funny pictures about French politics?
A joke about Spain and its politics?
Cartoons that are considered blasphemy?
Memes about EU and EU nation politics?
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
What couldn't the Nazi's take by force? They took over all of Europe save the UK and the V2 had spelled it's end if not for the combination of invading Russia, US involvement, and the dumb luck of finding Turing. After that the US and Russians are the ones who came back in and graciously decided not keep the territory they reconquered from the Germans.
The Europeans have forgotten the power of the guns, gallows and guillotines.
ALL purchases shipping to europe are chaged an addition 40% Euros in Free Speech fees to offset costs of dealing with E.U. red tape.
Wouldn't that include everything related to the EU? From my perspective, they are pretty extreme, and they seem to think they can rule the whole fucking world from their tiny continent.
Best bet is to just cut them off from the internet and the civilized world. Don't make us come over there . . . . . AGAIN!
Block all content from the EU commission. Block all email to and from members of the EU governing body and their employees. Do cell phones fall under these new regulations? If so, disable them.
They did say extremist content must be removed. Just following the rules.
-- Will program for bandwidth
No more ads from the CSU!
Leave the content up, get a bald/bearded guy, infiltrate him into the group and as soon he have enough evidences, everyone goes to jail.
It's completely incredible that there is any sort of radical group that don't have a police plant in it.
As long as making a spurious claim is a criminal offence even for governments. If the one making the claim is liable to jail time they'll do the work checking that this really IS extremist content and that makes the lack of time for the internet firm to do so unnecessary.
The problem with the DMCA et al is that they carry no penalty. The only one there is "knowingly lie about owning the content you claim to own", which doesn't even cover whether the content you claim this on IS infringing on that content you claim to own. As long as you can pretend that someone else is using X and you really DO own rights to X, you can't be done for a false DMCA.
You have to understand what is considered "extremist content" in those European countries (like my own) which already have similar regulation in their national law: criticising Islam, criticising EU-Migration Policies, reporting on crime, discussing non p.c. scientific findings, etc.
Essentially, anything can and will be deleted which the Government considers objectionable. A one-hour deadline guarantees that there is no possibility for carriers to even take a look at the material to be censored or raise objections. The requirement can only be met, if the deletion is essentially automatic.
Everyone whose phone number is a factor of an odd perfect number should be killed.
+1 thanks
Anonymous comments are as pathetic as the anonymous "sources" that contaminate gutless journalism from the New York Time
"He said that removing material within an hour is important because it's "the critical window in which the greatest damage is done." The EU's executive body said "propaganda that prepares, incites or glorifies acts of terrorism" must be taken offline. Content would be flagged up by national authorities, who would issue removal orders to the internet companies hosting it."
Just wow.
"He said that removing material within an hour is important because it's "the critical window in which the greatest damage is done." "
Oh yeah, because we are humans, and we tend to form opinions, and well, this is human nature.
"The EU's executive body said "propaganda that prepares, incites or glorifies acts of terrorism" must be taken offline."
Oh dear, there goes the PLO site. And a host of others. Oh, wait, they are Islamic, and therefore cannot actually be accused of dispersing propaganda. Sure.
"Content would be flagged up by national authorities, who would issue removal orders to the internet companies hosting it."
Not in the US, of course, since we value (or should value) free speech, even that which we disagree with or find somehow reprehensible. But the EU has a different view. I'll be encouraging my representatives and even the possibly evil Internet companies to reject this crap. Fact-checking often isn't. Fake news often is. Propaganda is universal. Deal with it differently. Because you know what the EU will define as "propaganda that prepares, incites or glorifies acts of terrorism", and it won't be Leftist or Islamic, it will be everything else. And they know better then we do.
Just like all good socialists.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
Sorry your such a fucking idiot.
Ah the irony of being called a fucking idiot by someone with grammar mistakes. It's like a compliment.
He admitted committing contempt of court by publishing information that could prejudice an ongoing trial via a live stream on his Facebook page.
Robinson made clear that he was aware of the restrictions during the Facebook Live video, as well as the danger of being jailed.