• LowleeKun@feddit.orgDeutsch
        23·
        2 months ago

        Not yet, but not for a lack of politicians trying. So far the european court has done its job and also some countries have stalled.

        • Petter1@lemm.ee
          8·
          2 months ago

          That would be the next law I‘ll brake on daily basis 😂 (smoking weed is the only one right now)

            • Petter1@lemm.ee
              8·
              2 months ago

              Hey there german friend 😄 it is still illegal in switzerland but police is still way more chill in switzerland. I was in Freiburg at a Festival and on the way there police stopped is and my girlfriend had to undress completely because their doggo smelled our empty grinder… I had the weed in my backpack sealed so doggo did not find that. My girlfriend asked what they would do if they find weed, the police answered, that they do not know what they would do.

              Luckily at the festival, everything was as chill as in Switzerland, like they find the weed at the gate, let you keep it and let you in. Smoking there was no problem either.

              One sad point is, that I did not find any ACID at the festival 😂 but I guess that is a me problem

              • LowleeKun@feddit.orgDeutsch
                3·
                2 months ago

                Happy to hear that they are chill, at that point it would make sense to legalize. Alteast having home growing and consumption being legal is something that is hard to argue against. I bet it is going to get much better for us in the future (hopium, i know)🤞

                • Petter1@lemm.ee
                  3·
                  2 months ago

                  🙌🏻 I be so too 😇 I guess as soon as the boomer are overruled by the new generation, there is nothing stopping the legalisation 🥳

        • Petter1@lemm.ee
          2·
          2 months ago

          Yea, I wonder what they would do against my self hosted matrix server behind VPN and reverse proxy 🤔

    • Aceticon@lemmy.world
      7·
      2 months ago

      From having lived in several European countries I get the impression that the Press being pretty much just partisan Propaganda generally it’s not as common as it seems to in the USbe, with the notable exception of Britain (were it’s pretty bad all around except the Private Eye which is actually a satirical magazine).

      That said, the way for example Orban entrenched his control of Hungary was by controlling the Press.

      This might be at least partly why in Europe the Far Right rose outside mainstream parties but in the US it rose inside them (and, curiously, in the UK it started outside, then was picked up by one of the mainstream parties at which point it really took off).

    • Elise@beehaw.org
      4·
      1 month ago

      Even if it is made law, it still require legal determination by a competent authority. Such a law can simply be considered ultra vires, since it is not constitutional in a democracy.

  • davelAEnglish
    391·
    2 months ago

    Wake up babe, new excuse just dropped: [enemy nation of the week] bots & trolls

    • ShinkanTrainEnglish
      20·
      2 months ago

      They sell so much of this National Security wrapping paper, I’m surprised it never runs out. Remember when they wrapped the Iraq war with it?

    • That_Devil_Girl
      21·
      2 months ago

      Yup, that’s why I’m here and not on reddit anymore. Got perma-banned for speaking against the genocide in Gaza.

  • Ogmios@sh.itjust.works
    71·
    2 months ago

    Just ignore the fact that the actual technological capacity to accomplish this is being steadily built and deployed behind the curtain while you argue over who gets to control who and how.

  • xenoclast@lemmy.world
    31·
    1 month ago

    Just give all the control to a psychotic billionaire and Russia. They’ll be fine.

    Also remember… friends don’t let friends use Twitter.

  • Manmoth
    1313·
    2 months ago

    It should also include “disinformation”, “hate speech” and “conspiracy theory”.

    • AVincentInSpace@pawb.socialEnglish
      145·
      2 months ago

      No I’m pretty sure those are actual problems. I do not believe, for example, that people with megaphones should be free to tell the masses that Donald Trump won the 2016 election.

            • threeganzi@sh.itjust.works
              2·
              1 month ago

              I think it’s easier to have to position that absolute free speech is the best solution if you are not part of a minority group who is the target of hate speech. (Not saying you aren’t)

              The definition is tricky and if such law should exist it should have a good margin from being used for arbitrary “I was offended” type of offenses.

              I don’t think prison, as you suggested, is a reasonable consequence either.

              • growingentropy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                2·
                1 month ago

                The repercussion to bad speech and ideas is inherent to the current paradigm of the internet: downvotes and ostracization.

                Maybe they will wind up on their own forum saying despicable shit, but they were probably going to do that anyway. Bad ideas love a vacuum away from prying eyes and outsiders.

            • threeganzi@sh.itjust.works
              2·
              1 month ago

              Yeah, fair, definition can be hard. But to give an example that I think is pretty clear cut: people standing outside of a mosque/synagogue/church arguing that those [certain people] deserve to be dead or put in labor camp.

              You could argue that those are just words, and be correct, but for the individuals that are targeted it’s not just words. They know for a fact that those words and ideologies do turn in to actions.

              I think it’s easier to have to position that absolute free speech is the best solution if you are not part of a minority group who is the target of hate speech.

            • AVincentInSpace@pawb.socialEnglish
              2·
              1 month ago

              Stuff like “gay people are unnatural and should be corrected” and “drag queens/trans people/[insert bogeyman here] are pedophiles coming for our children” and “n***ers oughta be whipped”

              • Manmoth
                32·
                1 month ago

                My point is that it’s a moving target that will be abused. The government should not and thankfully cannot regulate speech based on the grounds of “hate”. Hate is also not illegal. (At least in the US)

                For example, Christians are taught to love the sinner but hate the sin. Homosexuality, drag queens, transgenderism are sins in Christianity. With your new law Christians are now censored because their worldview disagrees with yours.

                Whoever has the right to define that term has immense power and that power will be abused just like the other labels in the meme.

                • AVincentInSpace@pawb.socialEnglish
                  3·
                  1 month ago

                  They aren’t censored for believing those things are sinful. They’re being punished for trying to enforce their views on what a person should be on people who aren’t them. The minute I start having to care about what the Christian sitting next to me thinks is sinful because he might hurt me if I don’t, he loses the right to free speech, you get me?

        • AVincentInSpace@pawb.socialEnglish
          22·
          1 month ago

          Have you not heard of MK Ultra?

          Of course I have. Because it was declassified. And that means it’s no longer a conspiracy theory.

          Also, if someone posts something online you think is dumb, do you really think it should just be deleted? Do you think that helps anyone?

          Tell me with a straight face that you have never even thought about blocking a single other social media user. Tell me you think troll comments like “What’s a major turn off when dating?” “If she’s black” should not be removed by moderators.

            • AVincentInSpace@pawb.socialEnglish
              32·
              1 month ago

              Every ounce of energy a person spends watching their back, making sure their fellow man isn’t out to get them, hardening their armor against the thousands of people trying to find a removed, find the one thing they can say that gets them to have a mental breakdown just because they think it’s funny watching them have a mental breakdown, is an ounce of energy they don’t spend creating, caring for each other, making the life of their fellow man just that little bit better, and unapologetically being themselves.

              But if you’re so insistent that words on a screen can’t affect you unless you let them, Mr. Forumite, I guess you won’t mind if I end this conversation by telling you to go to the hardware store and buy a rope and a bucket, providing exhaustive instructions for how to tie a noose, and telling you to end your worthless life before you ruin anyone else’s, because your parents clearly never loved you and there’s no way anyone else who’s sane ever will.

                • AVincentInSpace@pawb.socialEnglish
                  32·
                  1 month ago

                  So you believe that, since there are a large number of people who can be easily manipulated by words into believing or doing certain things, and there likely always will be, words may as well inherently have power and we should be careful with how we use them, but you simultaneously believe that the solution to this is just to make everyone grow thicker skin?

                  For the record, though, I don’t believe anyone should kill themselves, or anything that I said about you personally in the second paragraph. Quite the opposite, in fact. I only said that to make the point that “just words on a screen” can do horrible things to the right people, which I’m glad you seem to understand.

      • jaybone@lemmy.world
        4·
        2 months ago

        Should that homeless guy on the corner with a megaphone be allowed to tell people he is Jesus?

        • AVincentInSpace@pawb.socialEnglish
          21·
          1 month ago

          You’d think the answer would be “of course he should” until you realize that basically every cult that has ever existed has started that way.

          • jaybone@lemmy.world
            1·
            1 month ago

            Nah. Koresh, Jones, Manson, they weren’t yelling at people through a megaphone on the street corner. They were smart and knew how to manipulate people. Scientology, Mormons, same thing. I guess this argues against my original point, but how are you going to stop these people but still allow for free speech?

      • XTL@sopuli.xyz
        3·
        2 months ago

        Although the actual implemented measures are still privacy and free speech violation and arbitrarily enforceable laws and less oversight for government and police.

        Just because the wrapper says less made up things doesn’t sadly make the package any different.

        • AVincentInSpace@pawb.socialEnglish
          3·
          1 month ago

          I don’t disagree. I do believe that censorship of any kind is a very slippery slope. I’m just tired of the right-wing narrative that people telling them that their opinions are not welcome in certain spaces is censorship.