Why should a country tolerate an information system designed to circumvent the enforcement of the law, no matter how you individually feel about that laws. We boot fraudulent or illegal apps all the time.
What about an app that reports every LEO (not just ICE) around you? What would that accomplish except benefit criminals?
>What about an app that reports every LEO (not just ICE) around you? What would that accomplish except benefit criminals?
Do you think apps like waze should also be illegal? What possible reason would you want location of speed trap except to speed with impunity? Moreover whether it "benefits criminals" is irrelevant here, because the current legal standard is imminent lawless action[1]. Otherwise that would be license to ban all manner of materials, from anarchists cookbook to DRM circumvention tools.
My point was, if speed camera warnings are only for people wanting to break the law how would you explain this site to exist.
https://radars.securite-routiere.gouv.fr/#/
sos it means there has to be at least one other reasons for warning people of speed cameras which is not breaking the law, or do you think the French authorities want you to help break the law there?
I don't know which one but there has to be one right?
As for the US I'd say with a cynical pragmatism it's because they are privatized afaik and thus have a big lobby lol
It's illegal to have navigation in your vehicle tell you there's a camera coming up in France, enforced and punished by high fines (I moved here from NL which has no such law).
> Why should a country tolerate an information system designed to circumvent the enforcement of the law
This is the party line, but in practice ICE is not acting 100% within lines of the law. Unfortunately, it's possible for politicians, and even entire government agencies to lie. The evidence shows that ICE has both failed to enforce the law, and even follow the law themselves. This puts ICEBlock within other crime mapping or offender identifying tools.
What would that accomplish except benefit criminals?
There's an unbounded downside to allowing government too much power, including the power to act unobserved. Empowering criminals also has obvious drawbacks, but they're limited in scope.
"Rules for thee, not for me."
Those sympathetic to the American political right don't get to use that saying anymore, not even ironically. Not because it's offensive, but because they've effectively turned it into a tautology.
Such apps can be forbidden by law, and then this would be quite unambiguous. This is criticizing a company bending over backwards to what the government wants. Not really surprising, since none of these companies supports free speech for the sake of it, but to further its business, but still.
“ bending over backwards” seems to be just an opinion, or collection of opinions…?
I don’t have a dog in this fight, but clearly there has to be some credible argument why opinion X is better than opinion Y (held by company decision makers).
Assuming it’s just automatically better isn’t productive.
Indeed, an opinion held by legal experts, as the title of the submission quite clearly expresses. And on the other hand there is a history of Apple refusing other government requests.
A government agency can tell people whatever it wants, if it doesn't have a legal basis then it has no authority. Unless it doesn't respect the rule of law. It might and probably will follow up its orders with force, but that's still not lawful.
What does that mean? A government agency can ask a company to do something. But unless there is legal force behind the order, it is nothing more than a request and can be ignored. In ambiguous cases the lawyers of each side will decide if they want to go to court over the matter. Eventually either the government will fold or the company will give in to the request. Until then it is a matter of opinion.
Of course the government could also exert other means to pressure the company or simply negotiate. But that's outside of the rule of law.
This doesn’t seem to make sense as a reply. I explained what it means in the second sentence of the prior comment.
You’ve also yet to explain how your comment 3 days ago relates to the comment before that… so there’s no reason for me to go on an unrelated discussion.
Oh, on re-reading your comment I find that I actually agree with you:
> It doesn’t matter if every expert concurred, arguments from authority can not lead to opinion X becoming superior to opinion Y.
> At least not in a logically valid way.
But that's not what happened. What happened is that Apple dropped their argument Y without much fighting, which they previously upheld in face of government pressure.
So no country should tolerate Signal? If you’re someone who believes that ICE is only enforcing real laws and innocent people don’t need to be concerned, please get in touch with my bridge sales department.
Thanks, I stay with Mumble as my VoIP software. At least there I can name my channels and myself as I wish, without being cancelled by a not well thought out SJW word filter.
I do believe it is reasonable to hold repeat offenders. And I hope this law will be upheld when tried. These people do not understand democratic dialogue and so I have no pity for them.
> A Wall Street banker doesn’t have a carbon footprint that much higher than a regular person.
Found the millionaire coping with his excessive consumption.
No really, I don't own a car, don't fly, don't go on cruises, don't go on vacation three times a year any other way, live in a 50 sq m flat without anything but the most basic amenities. And you know why? Because I'm poor, that's why. Like most of Earths population. So don't try to tell me my carbon footprint is the same as Gordon Geckos, it simply can not be true.
> But it’s quite stupid: In both countries you need AC, [...]
Almost no residential building in Germany has AC, and I'm unsure what you mean by "need". Also the buildings are built to last, so no remodeling every few years like in the US.
That means one is stuck with most of the utility built into the house from the start. Remodeling a regular central European brick-and-mortar house to accommodate floor heating or duct vents is difficult and expensive.
Speaking from Switzerland: most building until recently were clearly built for cold winters, not hot summer. They are often insulated quite well and well heated, but recent summers showed that they aren't suitable for hot weather: they lack AC, rely simply on open windows for ventilations and frequently have too many large windows that can't be darkened enough, hence letting a lot of heat in
I agree with that take. Being like "look at Germany, we don't need ACs" is outdated bs. I absolutely suffer for almost 2 months a year because I don't have an AC including lack of sleep etc. We will see a rise, even though some people feel like that's the wrong thing to do with the climate change.
There's a fine line: if you have green energy, why would you care? Consuming more green energy actually improves the overall situation, as more money is available to build out green energy in the first place (especially with things like Green Planet Energy). It's just the need for moral superiority for some folks that's stopping AC distribution in central Europe imho.
I agree with you on the energy use. Even more so because the peak of cooling demand corresponds very well with the peak of PV energy production. If the system is well designed, cooling using an efficient split AC unit will be almost free. Besides, if they really don't want people to adopt AC it's high time to start adapting buildings and cities for hot summers , which means reducing the amount of paved surfaces, planting more trees, adding forced ventilation to buildings and blinds that really darken rooms.
Oh yeah good point! I always wonder why no one sees the very simple things you can do in a city. It shouldn't cost much to add trees etc. to a city with such a big impact
They are starting. We had a referendum in Zurich last Sunday to to finance a project to adapt the city to hotter summers. It was a complex situation, with the municipal government recommending people reject the initial project in favor of a similar project organised by the city environment department. It all looks good on paper, but I fear another case of money being spent most on planning instead of using it to adopt simple measures.
If you are interested, you can read all about it here:
https://www.stadt-zuerich.ch/portal/de/index/politik_u_recht...
So as I understand it's rejected? Fingers crossed it works out! But at least you can vote on something ;) In Germany you just feel left out and stuff happens (in either direction). That doesn't feel good at all.
The original plan was rejected because it was too vague regarding who would implement it. The counter-proposal from the city was accepted, therefore they will now start to work on how to best implement it. Unfortunately a large sum of the money will just be spent in planning and hiring, which is kind of typical for these public projects
Maybe a generation gap? I think the younger folks, who are only barely entering government, tend to take climate and livability much more seriously than the old generations who "got along fine without all that". Times are changing...
I've been running mine for about a month. Depends on your house, how much it traps heat, etc.
Really it's besides the point - you might not need a plunger to unclog the toilet or a fire extinguisher or a first aid kit often, but when you do, you really need it!
What about portable units? They're pretty popular here in NL, but I suppose people are also rapidly installing mini-splits, at least here in the south.
Portable units in general are just bad. Not very efficient, noisy and not that performant. And sadly it seems most only have single pipe, not two that would fix lot of issues.
They are just terribly inefficient. Now a lot are sold here, but it's just not a feasible solution to make living in summer more tolerable. A mini split or even better centralised AC for the entire building is much more efficient
I quite dislike all the crap they try to tack on like Sync or Pocket, sometimes cluttering the UI after an update. But still everything can be disabled, so not too much of an annoyance.
I'm not sure you meant to respond to me because this comment seems completely irrelevant. It doesn't negate (or even address) any of my points, and I didn't advocate for no police.
What about an app that reports every LEO (not just ICE) around you? What would that accomplish except benefit criminals?
"Rules for thee, not for me."