Anti government folk from the USA hated them and decided they were government overreach.
Anti government folk from the USA hated them and decided they were government overreach.
Privacy from companies maybe, privacy from governments and cops, certainly not.
Informed consent laws - good. Laws about third-party tracking - good. So it's some good, some bad.
But, on the topic of encryption, it's not like the US is pure here either.
The EU is not a monolith. There are many people pushing in many different directions. Sometimes the result is good, sometimes less so.
It is very much not clear to me that you should have privacy from governments or cops. Aren't the whole point of the government and cops that they are the institutions we have created to entrust with this access?
That is exactly what the EU is trying to do with the Chat Control law. Targeted law enforcement access to some data is not what is being discussed here.
We are talking about 24/7/365 mass surveillance without warrants and without the suspicion of any crime committed.
Secondly, incitement to violence is illegal in most countries. If you think it's not in yours, why not try it and see where you end up?
By all means, if that's the way you want to represent the issue, then there is no discussion to be had.
I will, however, represent it this way:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_the_United_Kingd...
I can be compelled in a few situations in this incomplete list were of the "deserved" type. But you can't convince me on all of them.