the court accused him of an “ideology of maximum privacy.”
In what twisted fucked up crazy world is that a bad thing?
I hate this timeline..
The same logic should apply to manufacturers whose products are used in committing a crime...
By this logic DARPA should be put on trial for creating TOR
By this logic every locksmith should be put on trial for making locks, every manufacturer of vaults and safes, every lumber company for making wood used in fences, every costume designer for making halloween masks, every post office for renting PO boxes... etc.
Evil privacy maximalists !
Dont give them any ideas.
That would be the story if a lifetime
please don't jinx it :(
Looks like development of such things will have to start happening on the dark web. What a ridiculous conviction.
In its judgement, the court accused him of an “ideology of maximum privacy.”
What the fuck is this kind of reasoning? Is privacy illegal now?
Oops I'm a privacy maximalist now, I didn't even know. Time to privacymaxx this removed up !!
Damn, even your slurs get maximum privacy.
I can't say removed ?? That's removed removed !!!
Absolutely disgusting. Privacy is a right!
Due to its mode of operation, the court considered the software to be “specifically intended for criminals”
Crime is an action a state doesn't like, not necessarily wrong or evil, but serves interests other than the state. If the state has to authorize everything, then the state is favoring dominance over governance.
When the state has to monitor all transactions it is tyranny.
The state is just the abstraction of the collective will of the governed, if the Dutch people have determined this is a crime against their society, then it is.
The state holds a monopoly on violence, another monopoly isn’t a stretch.
That's really only in theory. I don't think there's any country where the government does what the polis wants in every instance.
For an entity hat already has monopoly over violence, how difficult is it to claim monopoly over the collective will?
Collective will is just the myth that is used to legitimize the state
The state is also so much more than the will of the governed. To say that it is all there is to it would consider governments like those governed by the divine right of kings fo be stateless. Stalin’s Russia, or Kim Jong Un’s DPRK would then be stateless.
So they throw vendors of knives in jail too?
How is that a privacy tool?
I think you meant vendors of safes.
Hopefully, not all is lost. He has appealed and hopefully a greater authority will overturn this ruling.
Where could I follow up on this story?
This article was posted by a MEP of the pirate party. You can follow him on mastodon.
That is absolutely crazy. I wish the strength to go through that for Alexey Pertsev!
Dutch court convicts engieneer, not Dutch engieneer gets convicted.
Honest question, what do you mean by this? What’s the difference really?
Citizenship.
Thank fuck for the PirateParty!🏴☠️
Anti Commercial AI thingy
CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
About the licence, how are you going to prove that your data was indeed used in training a Model ?
My best guess for the hopeful outcome is the ai starts tacking on the license magic words at the end of things it says... But ultimately it feels like a digital version of sovereign citizens to me.
It's not enforceable in any way, it's just virtue signaling. Lemmy itself is a privacy dumpsterfire. GDPR compliance is literally impossible.
This happens with cash too. If you take in a bunch of cash, you have a duty to know what it's from so that you're not facilitating terrorism or crime or subverting sanctions. In fact, of you handle cash or finance, you generally have to take training on these laws every year.
This thing is the definition of money laundering and was known for exactly those problems.
There are reasons to use this service that are completely legal. They should sentence the people laundering money, not the people providing privacy tools that happen to be misused.
There's no reason people using tornado wouldn't have to disclose their sources to the authorities, same as cash.
But it does protect them from malicious actors.
But in essence, they are punishing this guy for writing code. And at least in the United States, code is considered speech. And this is a very bad precedent. I know that this is a Dutch court, but still that is not a good thing.
money laundering is a big bad no-no word that THEY have stigmatized (conditional brainwashing) in order to get every day people to SUPPORT their regime of THEFT and CONTROL.
"You are trying to keep your money to yourself and stop us from seeing it so that we can't steal some of it and punish you for using it how you like??? You're a MONEY LAUNDERER. Money laundering Money laundering Money laundering"
When you control money, you control minds, livelihoods, and monopolize fear itself.
its not the actual money laundering they object to.
it's that they didn't get a cut.
Official link to ruling (in Dutch): https://deeplink.rechtspraak.nl/uitspraak?id=ECLI:NL:RBOBR:2024:2069
Snapshot of translation: https://archive.ph/JKdbV
Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.
In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)