• Harpuajim@lemmy.fmhy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Did anyone actually read the article or did we all just head straight for the comments section after reading the headline?

    • MrFlamey@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      1 year ago

      If we team up, only one of us has to read the article and can write the TLDR so we can hit the comments quicker!

    • tlf@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Read it, didn’t give information to dampen the initial outrage. Six months only for a dozen or so cases and not against doctors or journalist doesn’t sound that convincing to me. A judge must grant permission also doesn’t help imo as the act is still is a major privacy violation to all those who interact with the subject in any way.

      • RaLiChu@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The French government is pulling a “if you got nothing to hide, don’t worry about it”.

        They say it’s gonna be limited to “when appropriate” but history shows whenever this sort of system is implemented, it’s scope of “when appropriate” gets broaden pretty quickly.

    • jabjoe@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Did you? Headline sums it nicely to be honest. Only it’s not just phones. It opens all same horror show of digital freedoms / privacy the headline implies. Awful development.

    • giggling_engine@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I read the article, what’s in it that’s not all there in the title? The only thing I can think of is that they “claim” it’s only going to be used for specific things. But we all know how that goes…

      • Harpuajim@lemmy.fmhy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        How about the fact that it needs a judge’s approval and that surveillance is restricted to very specific cases for a limited amount of time?

        • johker216@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          When people hold conspiracy theories about the government being some monolithic engine of evil, or people who don’t believe government should exist because “muh freedoms”, any time an arm of the government is used as a check they just don’t care. It doesn’t matter that their beliefs have no basis in reality - they will dismiss any evidence contrary to their beliefs because it’s dangerous to their worldview. It wouldn’t matter if 1,000,000 warrants are denied for every 1 warrant approved - the one approval is all the evidence needed to claim tyranny.

    • makeitra1n@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It was always like that on reddit and will be the same here. Headline -> straight to the comments.

      • Harpuajim@lemmy.fmhy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I guess it was inevitable with the influx of reddit users (I’m admittedly one of the recent converts myself). I just wish it took longer than it did.