←back to thread

1121 points xyzal | 6 comments | | HN request time: 0.927s | source | bottom
Show context
ManBeardPc ◴[] No.45209514[source]
Glad we could delay it for now. It will come back again and again with that high of support though. Also the German Bundestag is already discussing a compromise: https://www.bundestag.de/presse/hib/kurzmeldungen-1108356. They are only unhappy with certain points like breaking encryption. They still want to destroy privacy and cut back our rights in the name of "safety", just a little less.
replies(8): >>45209583 #>>45209689 #>>45209691 #>>45210026 #>>45210110 #>>45210215 #>>45210343 #>>45210669 #
uyzstvqs ◴[] No.45209691[source]
The bigger issue is that we need to make the EU actually democratic. Start by removing every branch but the European Parliament. That's the only solution.
replies(16): >>45209723 #>>45209744 #>>45209801 #>>45209870 #>>45209875 #>>45209929 #>>45210037 #>>45210135 #>>45210150 #>>45210195 #>>45210556 #>>45210659 #>>45210665 #>>45210877 #>>45213389 #>>45220083 #
1. hnhg ◴[] No.45209875[source]
And neuter the influence of deep-pocketed lobbying entities - US entities in particular seem to spend a lot of money on influencing EU politics: https://www.lobbyfacts.eu/
replies(2): >>45209926 #>>45210584 #
2. amelius ◴[] No.45209926[source]
Wow, Apple paid 7M for 9 people to have 144 meetings with the EC. I'm in the wrong line of business.

On the other hand, I'm thinking can we find 9 unpaid volunteers on HN to do the same?

replies(2): >>45210350 #>>45210500 #
3. pas ◴[] No.45210350[source]
yes, the obvious problem is that Apple paid people so in turn they worked to make these meetings happen, HN doesn't pay random people (yet!?) to knock on doors in various EU cities.

the "obvious" solution seems to be to make these meetings open, sure industry wants to push their thing, put it on the calendar, and let civil society delegate someone, and industry pays for that too.

4. HPsquared ◴[] No.45210500[source]
You're assuming the lobbyists keep that money.
replies(1): >>45210515 #
5. amelius ◴[] No.45210515{3}[source]
What you're thinking of would be illegal, but indeed.
6. jb1991 ◴[] No.45210584[source]
This site even has a disclaimer on the front page that its information is not necessarily accurate. Take it all with a grain of salt.