• 2 Posts
  • 381 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 26th, 2023

help-circle


  • Banks are allowed to use fractional reserve to lend several times more than they are required to warrant themselves, governments only force banks to have an entity who will pinky swear to write down up to a certain amount in everyone’s accounts in case the banks can’t. Neither skill nor labor produce money, central banks produce money as a loan with a repayment obligation, skill and labor only shift around the fractional obligations created by banks from thin air. Crypto is actually generated as an effect of the skill and labor required to secure its own ledger. People use golf courses to claim carbon offsets they sell in get-rich-quick schemes, or stamp collections, or digital collectibles, or natural gas extraction plants, or a thousand other schemes; everything can be, and is being used to scam someone somewhere at every moment, doesn’t mean everything is a scam.











  • Don’t be sorry, just don’t use downvotes to express your opinion… use your words.

    If you don’t like my arguments, go ahead and propose others.

    For starters, I see you referring to “case law”, which sounds like a US thing. In the EU, case decisions generally don’t shape the law, except Supreme Court decisions, and even then lawmakers can inform or reform those decisions. It’s usually more accurate to define a logical reasoning from the bare law, rather than expect decisions in one case to influence others.

    What do you base your reasoning on?






  • jarfil@lemmy.worldtoMildly Infuriating@lemmy.worldInstagram's monthly subscription
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    IANAL, but… I don’t think the law says that? My understanding is that the points are not related to each other:

    • You need prior explicit consent in order to gather non-essential tracking data
    • You can charge any amount for any functionality

    That would mean all these combinations would be allowed:

    1. Free, no tracking and no consent
    2. Free, prior consent for tracking
    3. Paid, no tracking and no consent
    4. Paid, prior consent for tracking

    If a site decides to only implement numbers 2 and 3… there wouldn’t be any conflict.

    Either everyone pays, or you have the right to privacy. Otherwise, long term, the internet will become divided and inaccessible to low income households. And that’s something the EU definitely doesn’t want to happen (net neutrality)

    Net neutrality doesn’t apply to services, only to carriers, who are considered more like utilities, but still aren’t required to offer a “free” tier. Services don’t need to offer an option accessible to everyone at all, they can specify whatever requirements they want (with only a few exceptions related to discrimination).

    Large social media platforms… is where current legislative efforts are in. Above a certain number of users, they’re getting defined more as utilities, and subject to more requirements, but still no “free” tier.

    The internet divide exists already: some households can afford 1Gbps unmetered symmetric fiber with Netflix, HBO and Disney+ and a few mobile lines with unlimited calls and 50GB/month data for 100€/month… while others can barely affford a prepaid 100MB/month mobile connection for 1€/month… but it’s fine as long as it’s a divide based on service pricing, not carrier traffic discrimination.