Alt-right-profilen Milo Yiannopolous har blivit avstängd från Twitter. Detta väcker ett antal tankar, som redovisas i den länkade bloggposten.
Paris, 21 July 2016 — Once again. The State of Emergency in France has been extended until January. In reaction to violence shaking the country and with the presidential election of 2017 only a few months away, political leaders are indulging an ignominious orgy of security-driven policy. Not satisfied with merely prolonging the state of emergency, lawmakers have also amended the 2015 Intelligence Act passed last year to legalize domestic mass surveillance.
It is hard to believe that only 48 hours have passed since the bill was sent to the French National Assembly. With incredible speed, in the middle of summer, the Committee on Legal Affairs of the French Senate has given carte blanche to rapporteur Michel Mercier (UDI - centre-right wing and former Minister of Justice) to erase so-called "rigidities" in the Surveillance Law adopted last year.
The provision, much criticised during the parliamentary debates at that time, provides for real-time scanning the connection data of individuals suspected of terrorist activities.
As soon as of the November attacks, with ink on the Surveillance Law not yet dry, an official for the Ministry of Interior was explaining that with lightened oversight procedures, "by cross-referencing data with an already-known very powerful algorithm, we could be able to monitor those 11 700 persons [in the terrorist watchlist] in real time"1.
Then, again according to Le Monde, during the previous National Council of Intelligence last January, the decision was taken to "put under surveillance all the communication data of the 11 700 persons with a S-File linked with radical islamism".
Until now, this form of surveillance targeted only individuals who had been "identified as a [terrorist] threat". But now, in accordance with this amendment, the code of national security stipulates that an individual has to merely be identified as "likely to be related to a threat" or to belong to "the entourage" of individuals "likely related to a threat", to have his or her metadata analysed in real time, and for four months, by intelligence services.
Despite the vagueness of the legalese, it is fairly clear that several dozens, hundreds or even thousands of persons are directly concerned, rather than just the 11 700 individuals who are already on the "S" watchlist. This severe extension of the scope of this provision is all the more shocking considering that in late May, testifying before the parliamentary investigation committee on 2015 terrorist attacks, François Delon, president of the CNCTR, said that this technique [of surveillance in real time] " was beginning to be applied, but only on a small group of people." He also repeated that the number of interceptions of communications (real time surveillance of both metadata and content of communications) was much lower than the authorised quota of 2700 individual and simultaneous wiretaps (covering both telephone and Internet lines and including all the duties of intelligence agencies, not just terrorism). Delon then insisted that the quota was "sufficient".
And yet there we are. Two months later, in less than 48 hours and without any real debate, the provision that was supposed to be a relatively targeted measure brutally shifts towards large-scale, suspicionless surveillance. In the short run, it feeds the political strategies of a few irresponsible people seeking exposure. In the long run, it could come to epitomise the mismanagement of security and methodical destruction of the rule of law, to which nearly all parliamentarians consented to vote in the past two years.
Besides prolonging the state of emergency, the law as adopted also changes the regulations on house searches for digital data. Censured after a decision of the French Constitutional Council last February, those searches can now resume (without anyone knowing what will happen to the enormous data collected during the first three months of the state of emergency).
Tuesday evening, as an anchor on a news channel was asking a representative of far-right party (not short on crazy proposals) whether carrying fire guns should be legalised "for all citizens", MP Isabelle Attard was uttering these words at the National Assembly:
We have witnessed, since the night of Thursday to Friday, a security-driven overbid as we have never seen before. It has been a race to the more months of state of emergency prolongation, all the way up to making it permanent. More weapons, more war, more mass surveillance, more prison, more preventive confinement, more internment camps.
The minutes of the debate reports that to this sentence, "several MPs from The Republicans (conservative party)" answered: "So what?".
So? So we repeat what Philippe Aigrain wrote here on Tuesday: that those who want to resist the mechanics of violence will have to "keep ploughing the soil of the possible, while it is the very idea of politics that others are burying."
Activism – Nozomi Hayase: In its seven years of existence, Bitcoin has gained wide mainstream attention with its disruptive potential in finance. Yet, currency is just its first application. The technology’s other potential lies in affecting governance and law. Democracy has weakened in the existing systems of governance. With concentration of power created through hierarchy, ordinary people are kept out of influencing policies or participating in vital decision-making. In this lock down system, many politicians do not represent true interests of the people and those who do are often blocked out. Can Bitcoin strike this balance of power? In this article, I argue how Bitcoin is not just an innovation of banking and finance, but at its core concerns innovation of governance systems, built upon a new security model that protects and empowers everyday people.
For many decades, activists, workers and concerned citizens have been working hard and dedicating their life to bring equality and justice. Unprecedented levels of government and corporate corruption in recent years have signaled a breakdown of checks and balances, while an extreme trend toward authoritarianism has discouraged popular dissent, often depriving people of hope.
Problems are not simply a lack of care or will for change. The fundamental issue seems to revolve around our basic view of humanity. Many tend to think that people are inherently good and operate with similar motives to themselves. The deep failure of democracy has shaken up these assumptions, showing this to be a naive and overly idealistic view of man. The 2008 financial meltdown and crisis of legitimacy exposed the existence of individuals who have a radically different makeup than the rest of the population. These are psychopaths, whom psychopathy expert Robert Hare called “social predators who charm, manipulate, and ruthlessly plow their way through life”.
Psychopaths exhibit total lack of conscience and empathy for others. They embody a dark side of individuality, with aggressive and narrow selfish desires that often come in conflict with the public good. Regulation has shown to be ineffective and laws often fail to offer protection because its very mechanism has been gutted and used by those in power for their advantage. The question now is how to account for this hidden vulture within humanity and build a system that is resilient to these adversarial forces.
In that seminal white paper, mysterious creator Satoshi Nakamoto described Bitcoin as a purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash that would allow “online payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a financial institution”. The core invention is distributed trust and Nakamoto stated that it was put forward as a solution to the “inherent weakness of the trust based model”, where financial institutions act as trusted third parties.
What is this inherent weakness identified by the inventor of Bitcoin? Most people are bound by empathy and naturally restrain actions in consideration of others’ needs. On the other hand, psychopaths are not governed by these internal laws of empathy and therefore cannot regulate self-interests. Moreover, as was articulated by psychiatrist Hervey M. Cleckley in Mask of Sanity, deception is at the core of psychopathy. With superficial charm, these predators hide their claws and teeth and gleefully trespass other’s boundaries, erasing their trails and even manipulating laws to get away with their crimes.
Trust is a vital foundation of human relationship and this has become psychopaths’ primary entry point for predation. These ruthless individuals fake empathy to elicit trust and then exploit it. When a governance model is structured in a manner that relies heavily on trust, such a system inevitably becomes vulnerable to this unknown member of society who can cleverly mimic good attributes of human nature and blend into society.
Representative democracy that requires people to trust those who claim to represent them in the form of elected officials has increasingly become a mask used by these ruthless individuals to hide and gain a grip on the populace. Behind the veil of secrecy, psychopaths leverage our trusting nature and construct promise-based governance. For instance, corporate masters behind the charade of electoral politics sponsor political candidates, who with campaign promises keep people passive and manage down their expectation levels. With future faking, which involves making plans that will never happen and gas-lighting, a tactic known to challenge one’s memory, they deceive and gain power over others.
Money dependent on systems of representation requires trust to work. It has now largely been turned into promissory notes and fabricated interest obligations, becoming a weapon for psychopathic control. The hidden captains of this managed democracy direct the flow of currency through financial engineering and have created incentive structures that are bent toward preserving their power. Radical deregulation is enacted under the banner of a ‘free market’ to manipulate interest rates and fiscal policy, creating never ending cycles of harsh austerity and usury.
Stimulated by toxic asset bubbles, derivatives and quantitative easing, these incentives work like invisible hands of the market, promoting fraud and depravity. It suppresses democratic values by controlling information, which is the currency of democracy, and constraining free speech with economic censorship, as was seen in the case of the financial blockade against WikiLeaks. All of this has resulted in the creation of a two-tiered justice system and derisked capitalism, where those in power are never allowed to fail and are not held accountable either by markets or the legal system.
Bitcoin addresses this inherent weakness of third party trust that has been exploited to create systemic parasitic rent-seeking structures. As asset-based digital cash, it offers an alternative to the promissory system of value creation by decree from above. Bitcoin’s underlying technology, the blockchain is a public asset ledger. This is a distributed database that records a history of transactions in the network without anyone in charge. Once data is verified, no one can undo it. This immutable timestamp goes beyond simple accounting of monetary transactions.
Bitcoin enables a new security model and it addresses the problem of security holes in the existing trust-based model of governance. Author and security expert Andreas Antonopoulos called this “trust by computation” that has “no central authority or trusted third party”. He explained this form of trust as follows:
Trust does not depend on excluding bad actors, as they cannot ‘fake’ trust. They cannot pretend to be the trusted party, as there is none. They cannot steal the central keys as there are none. They cannot pull the levers of control at the core of the system, as there is no core and no levers of control.
With this trust by computation, the need to trust institutions or central authorities is replaced with mathematics. Human trust is easily exploited by those prone to act with little concern for others. In the Bitcoin network where there is no point of control, attackers cannot fake trust. In order to gain control over the network, they would have to compromise math.
Power corrupts, and the best way to check and balance power is to not have these points of control in the first place. Thus, decentralization is a natural progression of security models. In a decentralized system, there is no ladder of power that psychopaths can climb and exploit others. Through distributing trust across a network and minimizing the necessity to trust a third party, the system removes vulnerabilities that often lead to such concentration of power.
So, how does Bitcoin distribute trust and secure this peer-to-peer network? In traditional systems, psychopaths rise to power, cheat and control the game. In these new cryptographic systems, psychopathic deception and attempts to cheat the system could manifest in covert chip fabrication, spam attacks and miners colluding in a mining pool to earn more than their fair share at the expense of honest miners.
Yet, the genius of this protocol is in the ability for this math-based network to enforce rules of consensus and fair play. At its foundation is Satoshi. The Japanese character of his name is translated as history of philosophy. This philosophy is like wisdom gained through history; an understanding of the contradiction inherent in man as both corruptible as well as perfectible. This is at the crux of Bitcoin’s game theory. Instead of naively assuming good intentions in others, the creator of this technology expected that some would try to cheat and attack the network. This is an acknowledgment that we live in a world where we cannot just eliminate psychopaths out of the equation.
This assumption is shared by developers who are committed to Satoshi’s vision of this particular security model. At the Hong Kong Scaling Bitcoin conference, developer Andrew Poelstra explained the mindset that Bitcoin lives in an adversarial environment and that the possibility of individuals acting selfishly and taking advantage of others’ good will needs to be factored into designing its governance. Bitcoin core developer Peter Todd also emphasized the necessity of adversarial thinking. In a Twitter interaction on the topic of security, Todd noted, “security isn’t about people promising they won’t do something, it’s about people being unable to do something”.
When greed and self-interests are condemned or denied, these aspects do not disappear, but are simply pushed out of sight and kept hidden. Efforts through law enforcement to regulate and punish selfish actors can just make them more cunning and deceitful. Bitcoin’s security model is based on honest accounting of our selfishness within. Instead of trying to shun this darkness, it finds a way to acknowledge and openly work with it.
What governs Bitcoin is a consensus mechanism called proof-of work. By embodying Bitcoin’s particular security assumption, it works like a lighting rod. It attracts potentially destructive forces and diverts them in order to protect the network.
Through using bitcoins as tokens of value with a combination of cryptographic hash functions, game theory and economic incentives, a whole new economy is now being created. Bitcoin mining is a broadcast math competition engaged by a network of computers around the world with clear rules such as the total number of bitcoin created, a predictable issuance rate and automatic adjustment of mining difficulty. By using precious resources, miners work to solve difficult math problems. Each 10 minutes, problems are solved and whoever solves the problem first wins a fixed number of bitcoins. This process leads to both creation of money and clearing of transactions and it is designed to create economies of scale, with rewards proactively incentivizing all to follow the network rules of consensus.
Miners play a crucial role in the Bitcoin ecosystem. Yet, what makes the system resilient is not just miners and developers, but everyone’s participation in the network. This includes merchants, investors, entrepreneurs and users. Journalist Aaron van Wirdum describes how full nodes that relay and validate transactions within the network check and enforce Bitcoin’s consensus rules. He explains how “not all full nodes are equal from a network perspective”. The full nodes that miners, companies and developers run “all add weight to a set of consensus rules”. Yet, he emphasizes how all users play a crucial role in governance, as they are what ultimately gives Bitcoin value.
By removing third parties, the inventor of this technology found a way to create a direct feedback loop among all participants, aligning the balance of supply and demand with the force of consensus, which is more democratic than the current oligarchic system that operates under a pretense of democracy. In the current financially engineered markets, monetary supply does not correlate with the real needs of people. Yet, with this new Bitcoin market, monetary supply is created through real demand with the feature of infinite divisibility (bitcoin can be divided into 8 decimal points and more if consensus is reached).
The only way miners and developers get paid for their work is to be on the side of consensus, so they are incentivized to respond to the demands of users. This direct feedback loop created though decentralization is a crucial wire that connects the lighting rod with the ground.
In the current system of representation, activists and human right lawyers have been trying to regulate greed and hold selfish actors accountable. ‘Power does not concede without demand’, yet in the existing model of governance, people struggle to make real demands. Any plea for change does not reach the merciless logic of this small section of society. While traditional efforts have shown to be ineffective in enforcing rule of law upon the elites, Bitcoin brings a new form of accountability through algorithmic regulation.
The Bitcoin incentive structure, designed as a lightning rod, captures and creatively engages the mind of psychopaths. Hare pointed out how a psychopaths’ brain is wired differently and how they have weakened moral force. Unlike most people, they cannot overcome temptations and restrain their actions in the face of opportunities for short-term self-gratification. Hare described this as a lack of ability to imagine the consequences of their own actions, noting that for psychopaths, “concrete rewards are pitted against vague future consequences – with the rewards clearly the stronger contender”.
Research from Vanderbilt University on the brain’s reward system in psychopathy further supports this finding. Lead researcher Joshua W. Buckholtz described how in experiments, individuals with high scores in psychopathy get heightened levels of dopamine responses in anticipated rewards compared to non-psychopathic subjects, showing how the brain of a psychopath is more susceptible to rewards. Buckholtz explained that this is because “once they focus on the chance to get a reward, psychopaths are unable to alter their attention until they get what they’re after” and these rewards override any concerns over threat or punishment.
With this ability to think like an attacker, market forces are used in the Bitcoin network to create a kind of electric circuit that allows energy to move naturally and convert it for good use. This enables a new law to regulate ruthless actions without relying on the moral strength of any individual or external authority. Robert Wolinsky, senior manager of blockchain research, explains how “Satoshi introduces a cost equation to cheating/collusion via the proof-of-work protocol”, making it clear to parties what the cost of attacking the network is and having them pay for it upfront. Furthermore, by making the rewards for playing by the rules higher than the value of attacking the network, it can proactively protect the system from the lack of impulse control of those who are instinctively programmed to strike with no remorse.
While the language of altruism and empathy doesn’t compute with those who have fallen from a communal ground, Bitcoin is a source code that speaks the language of cold and calculating rationale that can reach the selfish parts within ourselves and turn on the brain of the super computer of the world. Bitcoin mining reintroduces risk into the market. Here, concrete rewards are used to channel risk-taking and self-serving inclinations, making all compete for honesty and truth. The competitive drive of survival of the fittest, fueled by this global math contest does not create ruthless bloodbaths or make a killing on the back of someone’s misery, but instead is guided to serve the whole network. The fire of this hashing power burns aggressive and violent parts of our humanity, transforming them into generating global level security for all.
Over the decades, many democratic governments have been taken over by cannibals within humanity and become vehicles of control that have lost their fail-safe. Increasingly, people are held hostage by corrupted political systems. While the flow of currency is controlled, free speech as a foundation of democracy has increasingly become permissioned.
Satoshi’s act of publishing the white paper in 2008 unleashed the power of free speech. Progress and true social change is only possible through each person freely sharing their ideas and associating with fellow men and women to innovate better systems. Bitcoin is an open source project that brings together diverse developers around the world who are inspired by Satoshi’s freeing of speech. By writing codes, they too have begun exercising free speech.
While psychopaths deceive us and exploit our trust with promises that never match real actions, Bitcoin, as a holy grail of the Cypherpunks is stewarded by those who speak with codes instead of making promises. By making software open source, which allows anyone to read and modify the codes, innovators of this system make themselves available to be held accountable by their equal peers. This freely available code calls for voluntary association with this language of risk and reward, which then builds the network demand for armory against any psychopathic attack.
Governance without central authority can at first seem inefficient. But it is more secure than the current system of representation. The more the system reduces the need to trust a third party, replacing it with a borderless network, the lower the security risk becomes. The Bitcoin blockchain opens a door into a pluralistic society where all can participate in creating many governance models and currencies that manifest our true values through the principles of mutual aid and voluntary association. Upon such a secure foundation, progressive ideas of basic income, universal health-care, free tuition as well as privacy and truly free markets can be built as an app.
As Bitcoin gains more value, the proof-of-work lightning rod attracts malicious attackers. Man is fallible and each person alone can’t account for themselves. But, through our genuine efforts of working together to keep the network decentralized, a spark is created that emanates light out of our own darkness. Every 10 minutes, the heart of the Bitcoin network expands, time-stamping on greed and antisocial impulses, so the beast inside does not grow too large. The networked consensus lights the lamp of liberty, validating the universal truth that ordinary people are the source of all legitimacy.
Photo credit – Dr. Frankenstein’s dream II by Joaquin Casarini
Paris, 18 July 2016 — Today ends the BEREC consultation on Net Neutrality. This consultation aimed at consulting the people on the guidelines clarifying the implementation of the telecom regulation1. The version sent by La Quadrature du Net is the one written by the FDN Federation, we believe this answer is appropriate and we support its provisions.
La Quadrature du Net would like to stress the following issues raised by the FFDN answer:
Also, La Quadrature du Net would like to stress its dissatisfaction on the fact that the consultation was only available for English-speaking citizens which severely shrunk the pool of possible participants and hindering the democratic nature of the consultation. Only very few European citizens could participate to this consultation although all of them will be affected by its results. This lead to the creation of a multilingual citizen-lead consultation with the Save The Internet coalition. This consultation gathered nearly half a million comments that will be sent to the BEREC expressing the important interest of EU citizens for this subject.
As stated in one of our press release, the wording of the guidelines and the very obscure procedure sum to the global lack of transparency of this consultation. As La Quadrature du Net was present from the very beginning of the legislative procedure, we regret the lack of transparency of this stage of the procedure.
Paris, 18 July 2016 — La Quadrature du Net publishes an op-ed by Philippe Aigrain co-founder of La Quadrature du Net.
Yet another? But yet another what? One does not even know. Once more tens of people killed, many more injured. Once more, a human being has carried them over towards death and suffering in his trajectory of violence and self-destruction. And both ISIS and most western commentators rush to describe him as the soldier of a cause when one does not even know if and when he discovered it.
But also yet another opportunity for politicians to compete in destroying the values they claim to defend. When the French parliamentary investigation committee on the January and November 2015 attacks has just concluded that putting in place the state of emergency was useless in preventing the repetition of attacks, when President Hollande announced its removal on the morning of July 14th, here it is back. And again ten thousand soldiers are mobilized supposedly to to reassure the population, in reality to install a permanent state of fear. And those politicians who want to conduct the next government overbid by requesting anew the preventive internment of persons classified as "S"1. The word "war" ten times by minute from all mouths. Invoking in parallel the external enemy that is born from the disasters of our previous external policies and an internal enemy that does not exist yet but that one will soon be able to create by following the lessons of our American friends. In short, a huge competition to put in place exactly what those who claim the paternity of the attacks wish most: making our own universe unbearable so it resembles the caricature they draw of it.
What can an organisation like La Quadrature du Net say in such a situation, when it focuses on promoting what can make sense in a world to come, a world that resembles to what is at play already in the practices of many, from all origins. A world where commons are produced and the common good cared for. Where the future paths are considered open if only one asks the right questions, whether about technology, production and consumption models, capability-building for all, freedom and ability to express oneself, or the open debate on what is valuable. We can only repeat that what remains of dignity in Parliament will be measured by the number of votes to reject the state of emergency. What remains of justice and reason in our society will be measured by counting those who refuse to scream "war, war, war" with those who want to be able to say tomorrow that we have no choice but conducting it all out.
And we will keep sowing the seeds of other possible paths while it is the very idea of a polity that our failed politicians bury.
Philippe Aigrain, 18 July 2016
This is a guest post from Jay Emerson, founder of the New York Pirate Party and a long time political activist.
With uprisings happening all over the U.S. lately you might be wondering what to do when the shit hits the fan. Maybe you were thinking of going to a protest in your area to fight against some form of oppression or another, but don’t know what to wear or what to bring to the party, or even what to expect. These activist fashion and culture guides will help you navigate the complex world of “anti-fascist” chic!
Now i’m not going to go over everything because a good portion of pirates already know what to do. What I hope to give is tips and tricks to stuff you already know.
First, you need to get some protest threads and a backpack full of helpful items. Definitely a good read: How to gear up for the protest
Ok so you’re dressed, got your gear ready, and are about to embark to your local resistance area.
Before you do that, something I learned throughout years of activism was to bring a second set of clothing, but make it nice clothing. Business casual. Polo shirt and khakis or something.
During the 2004 RNC in NYC I was with a group heading towards Union square where we were about to be kettled on a side street that the cops were forcing us to go down. I saw where they were flanking us and then I saw the end of the block where a line of police were waiting while the cops started lining up behind us on the other side of the block. Before they got into position I bolted. One cop gave chase and I lost them around the corner by going into a Starbucks. So here I am dressed like fucking Mad Max getting stares in a coffee shop. If the cops check in here i’m screwed. I wait for a person to get out of the bathroom (so I don’t have to buy anything to use the bathroom), run inside before the door closes, change my clothes, and walk out in a nice polo shirt and khakis.
Even asked a cop for directions out of the protest area near the kettle spot too.
This is overkill as I needed the “disguise” to wear INTO the city since I could get arrested on-site due to me being watched and listed in the T.A.L.O.N. program at the time, but I always bring nice clothes now.
You’re at the protest. Man those cops look serious. All Stormtroopered out ready to give me some democracy where the sun don’t shine.
Here’s their most common weapons
This is important and keep in mind this is my own opinion of the types of groups you will meet at a protest. What group you are with depends on what you want to do that day. Feel like relaxing and just protesting? Find a UFPJ (United For Peace and Justice) type group or anywhere there’s strollers with babies in them.
Wanna be where the action might be? Look for the black bloc’s red and black flags, there’s your party people.
Liberal Democrats – This is your social protester. Do not look down on them Captain Anarchy, you’re at the same protest. They usually make up a bulk of the demonstrations and you can find them easily by their party’s candidate most likely in placard form en masse.
Socialists and Communists – Do you like free paper? If so join this group. They wear red and sometimes green but if you see a USSR flag you’re probably in the right place. They give you so many free pamphlets and newspapers of theirs it can be overwhelming. They’ll hold the line in most cases but some of them have an attitude of “not making trouble” for the cops because they are workers also so be wary if your not about that authoritarian love.
Anarchists/Black Bloc – These asshats are up for anything. Look for those dressed in all black with black and red flags. At the very least they’re you’re best bet at being protected if/when the police try to charge in. Although that’s a 50/50 because there’s some who run at the first sight of a cop coming near them.
Personally I march with the Anarchists and their Black Bloc. I go as a medic since I have training in basic first aid (volunteer firefighters all have to go through such training) and generally don’t get too involved unless my help is needed. I go with them because I have a knack for catching what we call “agent provocateurs”.
These are the 6 foot ninjas that are goading you to set something on fire or break shit. Don’t. Instead, if you’re confident, call them out for it.
No way around it, you got got.
I truly wish I had a general answer for you but given the USA PATRIOT ACT you can be held without talking to a lawyer. Anything goes here. They can charge you with whatever they want but most charges get dismissed.
In my experience they used sleep deprivation by blasting gospel music in the holding pens at a parking garage that had fence-like cells. Then bring you to the jail for processing where they might make you do humiliating things. For example, I was pulled into a shower area with 6 other people and we had to strip and hop like a frog.
Oh how the authorities love their petty games.
But you knew the risk. You knew if captured your enemy they would not be nice. Right?
Chances are you’re going to be a “catch and release” so the State can dwindle the numbers at the protest and put fear in the hearts of others around you. If you had the NLG’s (National Lawyer’s Guild) number on your arm and they actually give you a phone call, make it to them. They got me out right away.
Otherwise enjoy your bologna and cheese.
No tips for jail life other than to keep to yourself and don’t snitch!
Jay Emerson is Founder of the New York Pirate Party and a long time political activist.
He grew up in Farmingville, NY and is actively involved with numerous Immigrant Rights groups on Long Island. He was a medic from the very start of Occupy Wall Street in NYC.
New York Pirate Party can be found on Twitter, and as we speak they are accepting new members without membership fees: https://twitter.com/NYPirateParty
Images: Copyright with permission Jay Emerson
The European Commission has published its Privacy Shield decision together with a Communication. The Privacy Shield will govern the transatlantic commercial flow of personal data from Europe. The European Commission follows up of its previous Safe Harbour decision that was turned down by the European Court of Justice in its Schrems decision.
The core of Privacy Shield is hidden in provision 61:
(61) In the light of the information in this section, the Commission considers that the Principles issued by the U.S. Department of Commerce as such ensure a level of protection of personal data that is essentially equivalent to the one guaranteed by the substantive basic principles laid down in Directive 95/46/EC
Earlier published drafts of the document stated “as a whole”. Unpublished Commission drafts previously unlawfully obtained by Politico.eu and made available to their paid subscribers also contain the “as such” wording.
The provision “as such” carries legal weight and provides for narrow interpretations. It demonstrates that other assurances or statements apart from the DOC Principles are mere window dressing.
Most likely the Privacy Shield decision will be tested again in High Court as the concessions made are hardly convincing for privacy advocates. The Schrems decision of the European Union Court of Justice raised the bar. We will see if the Commission decision meets these standards this time.
The EU-US data transfer plan took several tough hits over the past week [...].
The European Commission pushed back a deadline it set for itself to finalize the agreement by end of May to sometime before “this summer,” but isn’t giving up on the agreement struck with Washington in February. Ruling out any renegotiation in the wake of pushback from EU national regulators and the Parliament, EU officials say they’re going to implement the accord, knowing that court challenges are inevitable. Those challenges could take years to get through the court system. [...]
Uncertainty around the future of trans-Atlantic data transfers leaves more than 4,000 companies on both sides of the ocean that had signed up to safe harbor in limbo. Champions of the data pact reacted with frustration to the latest political setbacks in Europe. [...]
The European Parliament’s resolution on the privacy shield acknowledges its improvements over the safe harbor pact, but pointed out that U.S. intelligence services can still snoop on EU citizens’ data in ways that “does not meet the stricter criteria of necessity and proportionality as required under the Charter [of Fundamental Rights]” — one of the reasons safe harbor didn’t survive the beating at the European court. [...]
On June 11th Pirate Party Finland (PPFI) elected a new board. After a tie between the incumbent leader (Tapani Karvinen) and the new challenger (Jonna Purojärvi) another vote was made. This time the new challenger managed to take the position to lead the party forward. Pirate Times reached out to Jonna Purojärvi with some questions.
Pirate Times: Tell us a bit about yourself – your age, your profession, your history in PPFI and other facts you want to share. Who is Jonna Purojärvi?
Jonna: I’m soon to be 28 years old and I’ve actually been unemployed most of my adult life. I’ve been involved with PPFI a little over three years, starting as a candidate for the European parliament. In 2014, I was named spokesperson for PPFI and with that I also held the responsibility for social media during the 2015 parliamentary election. In the summer of 2015, I was elected to be the chairperson for Finnish Young Pirates. This post will end this month. So, for a little over a month I held the chairs for both national Pirate-organizations that we have in Finland.
Pirate Times: Were you involved in other political or non-governmental organizations, groups or teams before joining the PPFI? How did you find out about PPFI and what made you join the party?
Jonna: No, I was pretty much down and out from everything before joining the PPFI. The only link I really had to the outside world was this blog that I started to write in late 2011. I was vexed about so many things and just needed to vent, basically. There were many political parties and members of other parties that asked me to join them from all across the political spectrum, but I turned them all down. I was too disappointed with the policies they’ve been implementing and most of all couldn’t stand the rhetoric they used. Then on one fateful night, a pirate who had befriended me on Facebook thanks to that blog, asked me if I had considered running for PPFI for the EU-elections. At first I turned this offer down – Early in the morning after basically no sleep at all, I made the decision to go for it. I’m glad I did.
Pirate Times: Do you have any specific plans or changes to implement as leader of PPFI?
Jonna: We need to change the atmosphere and practice what we preach. I don’t want our members to be for the party, it needs to go the other way around. In specific, the board needs to work for it’s members and be servants to its members. Before being elected as the chair of the party, I already begun to open more possibilities for people to participate. I believe that this was one of the reasons I was elected to this position. The goal is to free people as much as possible for them to be able to participate and do what they feel beneficial both for themselves and for the party.
Pirate Times: Why does the Finland need the Pirate Party? What are some of the main changes the party wishes to implement?
Jonna: There needs to be a party that not only gives real hope, but gives the means to actually make things happen. I’ve seen way too many times how people have basically been devoured by the other parties and they just lost all that made them promising as politicians. As a party what we want in principle is to open more possibilities for people to live their lives as they please, as long as they don’t harm others when doing so. In practice that means getting rid of regulations that deny people the chance to use their judgement, basic income to free people’s time from the endless bureaucracy, and we want to make it more possible to familiarize oneself with culture and information that for low-income people is made practically illegal, thanks to the copyright laws and paywalls.
Pirate Times: The next municipal elections in Finland will take place on April 9, 2017. What is the plan for PPFI until then?
Jonna: We will have a weekend, where we have workshops for the members of the party. The weekend includes different ways of learning together and sharing ideas with each other. This year the focus will be on the upcoming municipal elections. PPFI started this tradition last year, and I was the main organizer in the first one. It was one of the things that I heard people have wanted for years, and I’m glad that this tradition has finally found its place in the party.
Besides that, mostly we are fixing all sorts of little things that have needed fixing for a long time. Our website is old and messy, our public image needs to widen to match what PPFI is about and we need to get our means of communication in order, both inside the organization and with our public communication. We’ve been through many elections and found a lot of little things that need to work better in our organization, especially during the elections. We have to use that information and fix things since we now have some time to concentrate on these things. When the elections are near, all the time and energy goes to mandatory things, and there’s no time to make organizational changes.
Pirate Times: In the latest national elections PPFI achieved 0.8% with about 25.000 votes. What do you think of your possibilities in the regional elections next year?
Jonna: I think we have a great possibility to gain seats in the elections in the spring 2017 in multiple cities. Basically all we need to do is make the message loud and clear. The worst thing about being extra-parliamentary party is that too many people believe that they will vote in vain, or feel that their votes are lost if given to us. These are the elections where every vote for a Pirate will matter, and these elections really determine our future – If and when we succeed, the next parliamentary elections will lift PPFI in the parliament.
Pirate Times: During the campaigning for the national elections PPFI managed to collect more than 11.000 Euro in Bitcoin collections. Do you continue to receive a lot of Bitcoins? Did you ever end up in court for collecting too many anonymous donations?
Jonna: We do get some bigger bitcoin contributions every now and then, but it’s definitely more rare to receive any kind of bigger donations when there are no elections going on. Not long ago we received 5BTC from a kind anonymous person, and with that we are more able to run our organization steadily.
We have never ended up in court, but that could be a different story if we manage to gain a seat in the parliament with a campaign funded with Bitcoins. Finnish law doesn’t really know how to deal with Bitcoins, so as long as it is so, we’ll just keep running with this.
Pirate Times: Peter Sunde, despite not being active with The Pirate Bay for more than a decade, recently received a demand (from the Helsinki District Court) to pay 350,000 euros for music shared illegally through the Pirate Bay by its users. Now he plans to sue for defamation. Will PPFI get involved in this somehow?
Jonna: That remains to be seen. I’ve contacted Sunde concerning this situation and asked him to comment about this for us. We made an article, but for now that’s all we’ve done. I’d like for PPFI to get more involved, since no other party in Finland will say anything about this. The whole thing is just absolutely ludicrous and it really makes one wonder about the condition of due process that we have.
Pirate Times: What is your opinion on the state of civil rights in Finland?
Jonna: To me it seems like they’ve been regulated to non-existence. Of course we have the basis of civil rights in order, the bare minimum that makes it possible to say that there’s democracy here. Yes, we get to vote and yes we have freedom of speech and press. But for anyone who tries something new, there always seems to be a regulation that says nope, you just can not do that. We even have some difficulties respecting human rights here, with mandatory sterilization for transgendered people and incarcerating young men who refuse military service or the civil service. Even the civil service is said to be just a substitute for those who don’t want to serve armed service, but in many cases it is just a form of punishment. In practice, we are incarcerating men for their opinion and severely damaging transgendered people both physically and mentally.
Pirate Times: Do you have any collaborations with other Pirate Parties?
Jonna: Some, but there should be more. During this year we’ve been actively in contact with Estonian Pirate Party, trying to offer them the same help getting on their feet as we got from Swedish Pirate Party when PPFI was founded. Young Pirates of Finland have been more active in taking part of the international movement, since the international youth organizations just work so much better.
Pirate Times: Where do you think PPFI will be in 5 years?
Jonna: In the 2020’s PPFI will be in the parliament. With the financing that we get from the seat we will be able to create more possibilities for our members and be able to produce more material about our policies and finally have the luxury of paying people for the work they do. For now, we make the best of what we’ve got with the voluntary work that people are willing to give to us. With more financing, the organization will face some changes, but at that point we need to make sure we won’t trash any good parts we have just because we could buy our way forward.
Pirate Times wishes to thank Jonna Purojärvi for the interview and wishes her success with the leadership.
Featured image: CC-BY-SA 2.0, Hannu Mäkäräinen.
If you have dreamed about an European summer tour this year might be the best possible moment for a pirate to discover Berlin and its attractions. Starting from summer, the annual meeting of Pirate Parties International will take place in Berlin, on 23rd and 24th July. Right after the conference, Berliners will have another exciting event stay tuned for: Pirates are running for the local elections. On top of that, German Pirates will be celebrating ten years of pirate movement, again – in Berlin.
On September 18th, the election of the House of Representatives in Berlin will be held. Surveys show the Pirates (with their top candidate Bruno Kramm) currently polling at about 3%, despite the good work that the elected pirates haved done over the past years in the Berlin “Abgeordnetenhaus” (City Parliament of Berlin). Current predictions are far from the Pirate Party’s electoral success in 2011, when they reached 8.9% of the vote. The Berlin success in 2011 initiated a huge hype and brought a national German double-digit party poll result in 2012.
The hype vanished just as quickly as it appeared. Repeating it and successfully moving into the Berlin parliament, now requires a good deal of hard work, persuasiveness and solidarity from international pirates. If it’s possible in Berlin to prove to the public that the pirates can get reelected on the European continent, this sign will not miss its effects in terms of a second chance of the Pirate movement on the continent and inspire our whole work as well as a possible success in the national elections in Iceland.
The choice in Berlin is not only for the local pirates of considerable importance, but for all of us. Reason enough for us, the international pirate community, to head to Berlin this summer.
What can you do:
For questions or accommodation please get in touch with Jessica Zinn: firstname.lastname@example.org
Featured image: Modified screenshot from event site.
With over 93 000 comments and counting, EU Telecom regulators' consultation on net neutrality has received unprecedented attention from concerned EU citizens. The SaveTheInternet.eu is making a final push this week in a bid to reach 100,000 comments.
Paris, 11 July 2016 – The activists at SaveTheInternet.eu, an international coalition of NGOs campaigning for net neutrality, have one more week to make their voice heard: the EU must protect net neutrality. Their message is targeted at BEREC, the Body of Regulators for Electronic Communications, which is drafting new guidelines on net neutrality. With the 18/07 deadline approaching rapidly, the Telecom industry has also joined the fray by unveiling their own plans for a restricted internet.
SaveTheInternet.eu’s fight for net neutrality has been fought on many fronts, and with many different allies. Their actions have included a public street demonstration with hundreds of participants, and the ‘EU slowdown’ protest with over 7000 websites joining the ‘EU Slowdown’, over 40.000 faxes sent to the European Parliament and hundreds of phone calls by citizens to their representatives. Academics and tech companies have also supported the cause with open letters and public statements.
This broad coalition is facing off against one main adversary: big Telecom providers. Last week, an association of the 17 biggest EU ISPs unveiled their "5G manifesto", in which they called net neutrality rules to be watered down. On the basis of dubious arguments and analysis, they claim that a free and open internet threatens investment in new 5G networks. In reality, all available evidence points to the fact that net neutrality, by preventing anti-competitive behaviour, actually encourages infrastructure investment.
5G technologies allow ISPs a completely new level of control over the mobile internet. This makes net neutrality protection even more important for the continued functioning of the internet as a driving force for innovation. The only economic argument from the Telecom industry is their desire for profits from vertical integration. Thereby, the big telco manifesto confirms the worst fears of net neutrality proponents, namely that wide-scale interference with online competition will follow when the level playing field of the internet is no longer protected.
"If ISPs really want to cover the costs of the 5G rollout with net neutrality violations, our worst fears must have been an understatement.", says Thomas Lohninger, activist at SaveTheInternet.eu. "The 17 biggest Telecom companies on the continent have aligned behind this attack on net neutrality and EU commissioner Oettinger has joined their ranks by endorsing and re-publishing their manifesto. While the Commission has clearly sided with industry, SaveTheInternet.eu is giving a voice to the European public. We need to show BEREC how broad, diverse and passionate the support for net neutrality in Europe is. It's not consumers vs. businesses, or regulation vs. competition; it's the Telecom industry versus everyone else.”
One month into the consultation, the response has already reached unprecedented levels. BEREC's previous consultations received 19 responses on average, and their most popular consultation received only 72. The SaveTheInternet.eu campaign has blown these numbers out of the water by generating over 93,000 comments to the regulators, driving home the unique importance of net neutrality to the European public. With the consultation closing on July 18th, SaveTheInternet.eu wants to go out with a bang by breaking the magic number of one hundred thousand contributions.
Pirate Party of Iceland (PPIS) is the first pirate party ever to elect MPs in a national parliament. The founder of the pirate movement, Rick Falkvinge, was absolutely overwhelmed for being present at their latest General Assembly. In his short speech to the pirates, he mentioned the big historical moments of the pirate parties (from Sweden to Germany and now to Iceland) and Rick was warmly applauded when saying:
“You are about to change the world! It only takes one country to say enough is enough. It only takes one country to set the course for the future of civil rights. It only takes one country to tear down the gatekeepers of knowledge. As it seems Iceland is this country and the people in this room are about to write history! Thank you all! I’m so happy for you all!”
A questions that occupies the mind of pirates worldwide is if pirates in Iceland will take over the helm of the government. Well, only time will tell. The Icelandic Pirates have achieved a lot in a very short time and set the stage for a governmental change that would affect many people. They would not only change their own country but it would lead to a chain reaction for many other countries in Europe and the world. The conditions have been favorable for the Pirate Party in Iceland. The crisis in 2008 allowed grassroots movements to play a leading role in shaping policies in a more active way.
Also, the recent Panama Papers leak shook the country and made citizens turn their attention to Pirates. Pirate Party Iceland have, since April 2015, monopolized the first seat in the polls and continue to do so even today (after a short two months break). The failure, corruption and opacity of the old system has opened the way for the great success of the Pirate Party in Iceland.
Will Icelandic Pirates succeed and take over? It depends on their moves, on how well they organize their human resources, where they are going to spend their funding and how they defend the attacks of the status quo (whom know well how to play the power game). But it is true that Pirates of Iceland have the clear and unambiguous support of their compatriots and it seems that they will be the next government in their country.
Founded in 2012, with three MP’s at the moment in Althingi (the Icelandic Parliament), PPIS is leading the polls again and the climate of the General Assembly (GA) was exciting and full of enthusiasm. Parliamentary elections in Iceland are expected to take place in the coming autumn. Pirates must be prepared for the elections and have internal processes for their candidates.
On June 11-12th about 170 Pirates gathered in Reykjavik to hold the GA. The three MPs were there, as well as new and old members, a new Board and Arbitration Committee was voted, amendments in statutes were made concerning the collaboration between elected representatives, PPIS and citizens. The main thing of the GA was the presentation of the grassroot movement within the party.
On Saturday, June 11th, Asta Gudrun Helgadóttir (MP) talked about her experiences from the parliament to share her experiences with new potential candidates. The difference between being in a group of three MP’s instead of 20, which means a lot of prioritization. Birgitta Jónsdóttir (MP) talked about how amazed she was with the success of the PPIS. Birgitta suggested that PPIS, as a political party, should make a ten year plan of where it is collectively headed. “That would improve people’s trust in us” she noted.
On Sunday, June 12th, Helgi Hrafn (MP) held his speech about critical thinking and told a story about his great-great-great grandfather. Tryggvi Bjarnason was an MP 1911-1913 and made a law proposal that every library in the country should receive a free copy of every book ever published, at the time this was seen as preposterous. Helgi used this story to draw parallels between the rhetoric used back then and the one which can be seen today.
The elections of the new Board took place as well as the new Arbitration Committee and elections for other committees.
The outgoing Board, that started working on September 2015, presented how they had managed and organized the party during this time. Members of PPIS have increased significantly during the past year and they currently have more than 3.200 members. Its electoral influence brought the highest recognition to the party and the work of the outgoing Board was an important part of this. Among their achievements were the operation of Tortuga (the PPIS headquarters), the establishment of seven new departments of the party (throughout Iceland), the Pirate Party 60+ (for older citizens) and the hirings made (a general manager and an election manager).
Tortuga is the headquarters of PPIS which have really given a big push to the party. Tortuga has been a popular meeting place for the executive committee, other committees and councils within the party. Almost every night in the winter, Tortuga was booked for various meetings and discussions. The Board has worked to facilitate and promote the participation of the members in the policies of the party and other social activities.
Another interesting initiative, by Grímur Friðgeirsson, was the establishment of the Pirate Party 60+. The Board welcomes the establishment of the Pirate Party 60+ which concerns older citizens contact with the Pirate ideology.
One of the largest projects for the outgoing Board was to hire staff. After interviewing the most qualified applicants, Sigríður Bylgja Sigurjónsdóttir was hired as the general manager of the party. One of her first tasks was to hire an election manager; Jóhann Kristjánsson was hired (has experience of election management since before).
The outgoing Board of PPIS consisted of Bergþór Heimir Þórðarson, Birgir Steinarsson, Björn Þór Jóhannesson, Friðfinnur Finnbjörnsson, Gunnar Ingi Berg Gudmundsson, Halldóra Sigrun Ásgeirsdóttir, Herbert Snorrason, Kári Gunnarsson, Sara Oskarsson, Sigmundur Þórir Jónsson, Ms Olga Cilia, Unnar Örn Ólafsson and Þórhildur Sunna Ævarsdóttir.
According to their statutes the GA elects five board members and five alternate board members. Additionally, two members are randomly selected to be part of the board and another two members for the alternative board.
Elín Ýr Arnar Hafdísardóttir was elected as the new chairwoman of the PPIS board for 2016-17. Other board members elected were Sunna Rós Víðisdóttir, Þórlaug Ágústsdóttir, Rannveig Ernudóttir, Eysteinn Jónsson. The two randomly selected board members were Halldóra Sigrún Ásgeirsdóttir and Jason Steinþórsson.
Alternate board members elected were Jónas Ingólfur Lövdal, Eiríkur Rafn Rafnsson, Gunnar Grímsson, Sindri Viborg, Guðmundur Hörður. The two randomly selected alternative board members were Daði Ingólfsson and Kári Valur Sigurðsson.
All images under CC-BY-PPIS
The article was co-written by Julius Blomkvist Fridriksson
This is a guest post by Hugi Ásgeirsson, Pirate Party Sweden/Iceland
On August 11th, I’m moving back home to Reykjavík to do my part for the Icelandic Pirate Party. I feel that Iceland is poised for real change. I love my life, my job, my friends and my community in Stockholm, so this has not been an easy decision. But this opportunity is unique. People in Iceland are pushing for a new kind of politics and a better society. And we really need a new kind of politics, not only in Iceland, but also in Europe and the world. I feel that a lot of people in Iceland are moving past anger, and onto hope for progress.
Perhaps this is happening there first because we were the first to suffer the recession and because we’ve were the first to start cleaning up the mess. Perhaps my coming and going, observing Iceland from afar, has made me see this change in a particularly stark light. I saw it in the recent presidential election, where measured reflection won over pomp and arrogance. I saw it in the Icelandic football fans, who charmed Europe with positive energy, love and sportsmanship. And I’ve seen it in the Icelandic Pirate Party, that has radiated honesty and trust in the people.
I will be helping the Pirate Party in any way I can, and time will tell how I can best serve the cause. Primary elections for the list of candidates for parliament have just started, and I’ve humbly put my name in the running, which is decided democratically in an online vote by party members. If called upon, I will stand for election. If not, I will do all that I possibly can to campaign, to build the organisation and help define our political agenda. I will do my best to learn from those around me, use my network and bring people and ideas together to strengthen the foundation of our platform.
As many of you know, this is not the first time I join a Pirate Party. I was seventeen years old when the Swedish Pirate Party was founded in 2006, and I joined on day one. Politicians didn’t understand the internet or how society was about to change, and I’m afraid they still don’t, event though that change is looking them straight in the eye. When we first started collecting signatures to help form the Swedish Pirate Party, we knew that a great paradigm shift was taking place. This was before WikiLeaks or Bitcoin. Before Android and iPhone. Before Facebook, Twitter and Youtube. Teachers and scholars mocked Wikipedia. We, the online young, were frustrated that society wouldn’t listen. This force could be harnessed for good, to educate, to empower, to liberate. Instead, the establishment saw it as a threat to be contained, regulated and limited. In 2007, I became the first chairman of the youth wing “Young Pirates”. With our unconventional style, we started getting noticed, but life took me in a different direction, and in 2008 I moved to Reykjavík to study at the University of Iceland. Later, I moved to China for two years, and it wasn’t until 2016 that I returned to the Pirates, this time in Iceland.
I believe that Icelandic Pirate politics have taken the original idea to its next logical conclusion. As the power to connect, publish and share was moved into our hands, our view of authority has changed. It is as if power has become liquid and shifts faster than before. Some people have become uneasy, looking to strong old-school leaders with simple solutions to force their world back into a solid shape. Pirates believe that this is a futile effort. What we need is a new paradigm for leadership to navigate an unpredictable ocean. Pirates ask questions, are curious and dare to change their minds in light of new evidence. Leaders should be nodes who empower the ones around them that need to be heard and who listen for valuable perspectives. We need to see the wisdom of our communities as our greatest asset. At the same time, we need to hone our moral courage and take action for what we believe is just. I have seen this quality in the Icelandic Pirates, and that is our most important asset.
We have a lot of exciting work ahead of us. A new constitution for Iceland. Important work to protect and secure the environment. Visions for a better society that reach far beyond short sighted term-by-term politics. But perhaps most importantly, if anything else is to succeed, we need to rebuild trust in politics and democracy. I’m putting my trust with the Pirates.
Hugi Ásgeirsson is a serial community builder and organizer. He is involved in building creative communities, participatory festivals and open social spaces in Stockholm and has also worked as a magazine editor, an english teacher and most recently as a web developer. He loves literature, philosophy, art, science and hiking.
Featured image: cropped from copyright with permission Hugi Ásgeirsson
11 July 2016 update: On Friday 8 July, Member States have taken an "adequacy decision" that authorises the European Commission to adopt Privacy Shield on 12 July. La Quadrature du Net deeply deplores the rush with which Member States have analysed and adopted this text within only one week, without even waiting for the evaluation by European National Data Protection Authorities, set to meet on July 25 to discuss whether their suggestions and reservations were taken into account in the new text.
Paris, 8 July 2016 — On 8 July 2016, EU Member States, gathering as the so-called "Article 31 Committee", are set to decide whether to adopt or not the "adequacy decision" that will establish a framework for the transfer of personal data between the USA and the EU: the Privacy Shield. This decision, adopted in a rush, does not address the concerns raised during the past weeks by European National Data Protection Authorities (NDPAs), the European Parliament, different European governments, and human rights organisations.
On 6 October 2015, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) declared invalid the "Safe Harbor" agreement, which ruled data transfers since 2000. It argued that the agreement enabled massive data collection and generalised surveillance, without establishing effective legal means in the USA for European citizens. Currently, it is obvious that the new Privacy Shield does not comply with the legal demands from the Court of Justice either.
As it is now, the adequacy decision under negotiation will not replace existing, less restrictive measures like the standard contractual clauses or the binding corporate rules, but it will overlap them instead. As such, the very usefulness of the Privacy Principles that companies should respect under Privacy Shield is questionable. For example, if a company covered by the Privacy Shield gets excluded from it for non-compliance, it may still be able to keep processing these data through the two above mentioned mechanisms.
Apart from these serious issues, the core of the decision actually concerns the access to data by US public authorities. Instead of referring to "mass surveillance", the text calls it "bulk collection". The United States do not consider "bulk collection" as surveillance, but the European Union does -- by means of the Court of Justice of the European Union. Indeed, the Court has already ruled that bulk collection does constitute mass surveillance (in the judgement of 6 October 2015 Maximillian Schrems v Data Protection Commissioner), which is contrary to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. This judgement lead to the invalidation of the "Safe Harbor". From all accounts, the empty promises and the weak safeguards mentioned by the US government will not be enough to make the Privacy Shield decision adequate with European jurisprudence.
The same applies for the concerns raised in relation to legal remedy. One of the requirements expressed by the CJEU, the G29 (the European Data Protection Authorities), the EDPS (European Data Protection Supervisor) and the civil society is that EU data subjects affected by transfers of their data to this third country should have access to legal remedy and the opportunity to challenge any illegal processing or surveillance. Safe Habor established a mechanism involving a mediator ("Ombudsperson") in order to address this concern. In theory, it would have been a good solution, if the Ombudsperson were truly independent. However, this mediator is appointed by the US Secretary of State, and plaintiffs may not reach the Ombudsperson directly, as they are required to go through two layers of authorities before, national and European. Moreover, the Ombudsperson will only be able to inform the plaintiff that due verifications have taken place, and may ensure that illegal surveillance is ceased, but the plaintiff will never really have access to the specific reality of the surveillance conducted upon them. This procedure resembles the National Commission of Control of Surveillance Practices established in France through the Surveillance Law (Loi Renseignement) and, similarly, does not offer enough legal guarantees for citizens.
The Privacy Shield project was prepared and imposed in a rush by the European Commission and the US Department of Commerce, and does not offer sufficient guarantees for protecting the privacy of European citizens. The project ignores the CJEU judgment that invalidated Safe Harbor concerning the massive surveillance exerted through the data collection of users. It is essential that European governments and National Data Protection Authorities reject this agreement, and that they work together to draft a set of rules that actually protects fundamental rights. The necessity to establish a legal framework for companies whose economic model is based on exploiting personal data must not become an excuse to set up a sordid bazar that sells the private life of tens of millions of European Internet users.
Salut à toutes et à tous !
Voici la newsletter 72 de La Quadrature du Net !
Le mois de juin 2016 est pour La Quadrature du Net placé tout entier sous le signe de l'Union européenne et la campagne contre la directive Terrorisme adoptée le 4 juillet en commission de Libertés Civiles du Parlement européen.
Le mois de juin à La Quadrature du Net finit comme il a commencé : avec le projet de directive Terrorisme de l'Union européenne.
La directive devait être votée en en commission des Libertés Civiles (LIBE) du Parlement européen le 15 juin, puis le 21, enfin le 27 juin mais la surprise créée par le Brexit a une nouvelle fois repoussé le vote au 4 juillet.
La Quadrature du Net publiait le 1er juin un communiqué très complet sur la question, présentant l'apparition du texte sur les tables de négociations européennes, ainsi que les différentes positions des députés européens que La Quadrature a pu rencontrer lors de sa campagne de sensibilisation, à Bruxelles et à Starsbourg. Le communiqué contient aussi une synthèse des points problématiques du texte.
Le vote en commission LIBE n'augure rien de bon pour la suite du processus de négociation. Maintenant le texte devrait être examiné en plénière du Parlement européen sauf que la rapporteure, Monika Hohlmeier a reçu un mandat pour négocier le texte avec la Commission européenne et le Conseil de l'Union européenne (trilogue). Ces processus de négociation opaques risquent de forcer la main aux députés européens en leur faisant voter un texte déjà négocié.
En lire plus sur le site de La Quadrature du Net :
Analyse du texte :
En préparation de la révision de la directive ePivacy, l'Union européenne a organisé une consultation sur les données personnelles entre le 12 avril et le 5 juillet.
Après l'adoption du règlement Données personnelles, appelé GDPR, en décembre 2015, il fallait refondre la directive qui existe depuis 2002. Elle précise en particulier la façon dont les FAI doivent traiter les données personnelles de leurs clients : mais de nombreux services actuels ne sont pas couverts par l'ancienne directive (les messageries instantanées dans les réseaux sociaux, par exemple).
Cette révision de la directive ePrivacy devrait être l'occasion d'introduire dans le texte les notions de droit à l'anonymat et au chiffrement, ou de s'opposer à la logique habituelle dite de « la gratuité en échange de vos données personnelles », si largement pratiquée.
Mais la Quadrature du Net s'inquiète beaucoup de nouvelles dispositions dérogatoires qui laisseraient les États disposer comme ils le veulent des données personnelles de leurs citoyens (et des autres), sous prétexte de la sécurité nationale.
Le 7 juin, le BEREC, organe européen qui rassemble les régulateurs des télécoms des États membres, a publié ses lignes directrices pour l'application du Règlement européen sur les télécommunications.
Le texte n'est disponible qu'en anglais, ce qui ne simplifie pas le travail d'analyse, et reflète une fois encore le manque de transparence qui règne depuis le début du travail du BEREC.
Pour répondre à la consultation, La Quadrature du Net a donc décidé de publier le texte sur une plateforme de commentaires et de lancer parallèlement une traduction collaborative.
Rappelons qu'il est toujours temps de visiter le site Save The Internet pour répondre à la consultation alternative lancée par des associations européennes (dont La Quadrature) et de signaler vos observations d'entrave à la neutralité du Net sur Respect My Net.
Ce communiqué publié par La Quadrature du Net le 7 juin est à lire sur notre site.
La Quadrature du Net annonçait le 14 juin sa participation à la conférence « Chiffrement et Droits de l'Homme » organisée à Genève par l'ONU et par l'Ordre des Dominicains.
La conférence s'est tenue le mercredi 15 juin au Palais des Nations à Genève, sous un grand soleil, comme en témoigne le pitch de présentation d'Adrienne Charmet, coordinatrice des campagnes de La Quadrature du Net. Elle s'incrit dans le contexte des discussions sur les droits humains actuellement en cours au sein du Conseil des droits de L'Homme.
Au cotés d'Adrienne Charmet et du modérateur Eric Salobir (frère dominicain, membre du Order of Preachers for technology, Information and Communication), intervenaient David Kaye (rapporteur spécial de l'ONU sur la promotion et la protection du droit à la liberté d'opinion et d'expression) et Bryan Ford (professeur associé en informatique et sciences de la communication à l'École Polytechnique fédérale de Lausanne, spécialiste du chiffrement).
L'intervention d'Adrienne Charmet et celles des autres intervenants sont visibles et téléchargeables sur le Médiakit de La Quadrature du Net.
À l'occasion de la discussion en commission mixte paritaire (CMP), le 29 juin, du Projet de loi pour une République numérique, l'Observatoire des Libertés et du Numérique (OLN), dont La Quadrature du Net fait partie, rappelle sa déception dans un communiqué adressé aux parlementaires : présenté comme un sommet innovant de consultation citoyenne, l'élaboration du texte a cependant laissé de côté l'immense majorité des amendements proposés par les internautes et les associations, ignoré les recommandations positives du Conseil National du Numérique et ouvert la porte aux habituelles demandes des lobbies de l'industrie culturelle. La défense du logiciel libre, l'affirmation des Communs, la neutralité du Net ou la protection des données personnelles sont les grandes oubliées du texte final.
L'OLN attire particulièrement l'attention des membres de la CMP sur l'article 23, qui demande aux plateformes d'avoir une action « proactive » contre les contenus illicites, et pourrait leur demander d'exercer un surveillance automatique des contenus.
Un texte cinglant à lire ici : https://www.laquadrature.net/fr/pjl-numerique-deception
En accord avec sa récente réorientation stratégique, La Quadrature du Net a commencé à organiser ses ateliers. Le 16 juin, le Garage accueillait une session de formation de de formateurs aux chiffrofêtes. Vous saurez tout en lisant son compte-rendu sur ce site dédié aux ateliers passés et à venir.
Il existe de nombreuses façons de participer à l'action menée par La Quadrature du Net. Vous pouvez aider La Quadrature en parlant de ses publications autour de vous, et en les diffusant sur vos blogs, Twitter, Diaspora*, vos réseaux sociaux, listes de discussion… Bref, en « buzzant ».
La Quadrature du Net a aussi besoin d'aide pour un grand nombre de tâches quotidiennes, par exemple pour l'édition de sa revue de presse, des traductions, la mise à jour de son wiki, des créations graphiques ou sonores… Si vous en avez la capacité, vous pouvez contribuer à améliorer les outils comme Memopol, Respect My Net, ou le Piphone, Contrôle Tes Données, ou bien nous proposer de nouveaux projets sur notre GitLab. N'hésitez pas à nous contacter pour avoir plus d'information à ce sujet.
Enfin, si vous en avez les moyens, vous pouvez également nous soutenir en effectuant un don.
Juillet 2016 :
Aout 2016 :
Pour vous inscrire aux ateliers, écrire à contact @laquadrature.net.
June ends as it began at La Quadrature du Net: with the draft of the European Directive on Combating Terrorism.
The Directive should have been adopted on 4 July in the LIBE commission of the European Parliament. The vote should have taken place the 15 June, then on 21 June, and finally on 27 June but the Brexit has once again postponed the vote to 4 July.
La Quadrature du Net published on 1 June a comprehensive statement on the issue, explaining how the text arrived in the negociations, as well as the positions of MEPs that La Quadrature met during its awareness campaign in Brussels and Starsbourg. The press release contains also a summary of the problematic points of the text.
More on our website: https://www.laquadrature.net/en/terrorisme-directive-european-parliament...
The vote in the LIBE committee is not good omen for the next steps of the negotiations. Now the text should be studied by the whole European Parliament but the rapporteur, Monika Hohlmeier got a mandate to negotiate the text with the European Commission and the Council of the European Union (trialogue). Those blurry negotiation processes may compel MEPs by making them vote on a sealed deal.
Analysis of the text: https://wiki.laquadrature.net/Directive_Terrorisme/en
In preparation for the review of the ePivacy Directive, the European Union organised a consultation on personal data between 12 April and 5 July.
After the vote of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in December 2015, the Directive of 2002 needed to be reviewed: it specifies how ISPs treat their customers' personal data, but many current popular services are not covered by the old directive (instant messaging in social networks, for example).
The review of the ePrivacy Directive should be an opportunity to introduce into the text the concepts of right to anonymity and encryption, or to oppose the widely logic of "free in exchange for your personal data".
But La Quadrature du Net is concerned by the many new exceptions which would leave Member States dispose as they want of their citizens' personal data under the guise of national security.
On 7 June, BEREC, the European organisation which brings together national telecom regulators of every Member State, published its guidelines for the application of the European regulation on telecommunications.
The text of the guidelines is available in English only reflects the lack of transparency that prevails since the beginning of the BEREC consultation.
The statement released by La Quadrature du Net on 7 June is on our website: https://www.laquadrature.net/en/NetNeutrality-BEREC
La Quadrature du Net announced (FR) on 14 June its participation in the "Encryption and Human Rights" conference organised in Geneva by the UN and the Dominican Order.
The conference was held on 15 June at the Palais des Nations in Geneva, under a bright sun, as shown in Adrienne's statement.
Beside Adrienne Charmet and moderator Eric Salobir (Dominican friar, member of the Order of Preachers for Technology, Information, and Communication), other speakers were
<href> David Kaye (UN Special Rapporteur on promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression) and Bryan Ford (encryption specialist, Associate Professeur at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Lausanne).
You can watch or download all the speeches here.</href>
The Bill for a Digital Republic being discussed in a joint parliamentary committee (CMP) on 29 June, the Observatory for Freedoms and Digital World (Observatoire des Libertés et du Numérique, OLN), of which La Quadrature du Net is a member, repeats its disappointment in a statement (FR) addressed to French MPs: presented as an innovative consultation of citizens, the process has left out the vast majority of amendments proposed by citizens, ignored the positive recommendations of the French National Digital Council and opened the door to the usual demands of lobbies of the culture industry. The defense of free software, the affirmation of the Commons, Net Neutrality, or the protection of personal data were forgotten in the final text.
The OLN draws particular attention to the members of the CMP on Article 23, which requires platforms to have a "proactive" action against illegal content, and may ask them to perform an automatic surveillance of content.
Read the statement (in French) on our website: https://www.laquadrature.net/fr/pjl-numerique-deception
In line with its recent strategic reorientation, La Quadrature du Net has begun to organise workshops. On 16 June, the 'Garage' hosted a training session for future cryptoparties. You can read Okhin's report (FR) on the new website dedicated to workshops.
Pour vous inscrire à la newsletter, envoyez un email à email@example.com
Pour vous désinscrire, envoyez un email à firstname.lastname@example.org
I Almedalen ordnade Tidningen Syre ett seminarium där bland annat jag fick presentera mitt förslag till basinkomst.
Jag har redigerat ihop en video med min presentation (15 min), följt av en diskussion med bland annat Markus Kanerva (tankesmedjan Tänk), Karin Jansson (Miljöpartiet), Gustav Karreskog (Centerstudenter) och Martin Jordö (Feministiskt Initiativ). Harald Enoksson var moderator.
Copy and Share!
infomaterial I dagarna släppte vi till sist det nya informationsmaterial som jag, emma Opassande och Magnus jobbat på i månader. Materialet har tagits emot väldigt väl, vilket förstås är otroligt kul. Det är mycket arbete som ligger bakom, och det är första gången som jag haft en så stor del i ett liknande projekt, vilket gör det ännu mer roligt för mig personligen. Du kan se allt material i hög upplösning här.
Det som startade arbetet med materialet var verksamhetsplanen, som antogs av partiets medlemmar på höstmötet 2015: ”Lokala föreningar och aktiva ska därför kunna fortsätta beställa kostnadsfria paket med kampanjmaterial som flyers, foldrar och affischer. En hel del grundmaterial och odaterat material från riksdagsvalrörelsen återstår från 2014, men partiet ska även under 2016 lansera en helt ny kampanj med fokus på aktivistvärvning, för att på det sättet kunna bygga upp en kraftig aktivistbas för de kommande åren.”
Vid partistyrelsens möte i januari togs frågan upp, och det formades då en grupp bestående av emma, Magnus och mig. emma har varit med och designat ett antal av partiets tidigare kampanjer, medan jag tidigare som mest medarbetat på något hörn, även om jag har bred erfarenhet av att skriva sälj- och kampanjtexter från mitt tidigare heltidsjobb och numera deltidsjobb som copywriter. Magnus var ny till arbetet, och tog en roll som bollplank som kom med väldigt många bra synpunkter och idéer som jag och emma missade.
Jag presenterade ett första förslag för gruppen i april, som för den som är nyfiken går att läsa här. Det var faktiskt skrämmande likt slutresultatet textmässigt, även om det var långt ifrån färdigskrivet och en hel del skrevs om. För den som inte känner mig är jag jävligt bra på att skriva, men urkass på design. emma tog över, och fick fram förslag efter förslag på hur texterna kunde ta grafisk form, medan jag fortsatte skriva vidare efter kommentarer från emma och Magnus.
Vi tog så småningom fram en folder och en flyer som följde de grundtankar jag lagt fram väldigt nära – ett fokus på teknikoptimism, framtidsanda, vikten av ett fritt internet och mänskliga rättigheter. De fyra affischteman jag hade lagt fram från början var ”mänskliga rättigheter och massövervakning”, ”teknikoptimism”, ”transparens”, och ”nätneutralitet och upphovsrätt”. Den sista fick rubriken ”Vi älskar internet”, en repris från affischen ”Vi gillar internet” som gjordes inför EU-valet 2009.
I slutändan var det tre affischer som togs fram, med teman ”massövervakning och transparens”, ”internet”, och ”teknikoptimism”. När de var på väg att gå till tryck fick vi höra att det skulle bli billigare att trycka upp en fjärde affisch (tryckerier fungerar ungefär lika ologiskt som Guds vrede), men att det var bråttom att få fram den.
Det här insåg vi mitt under en piratöl i Lund, varpå jag och emma pratade i telefon i en halvtimme i försök att hitta ett bra tema och slogan. Efter ett tips av min partner Ali insåg vi att det var solklart att ta kulturpolitik, och emma föreslog till sist den fantastiska rubriken ”Kultur är mer än Dramaten”. Vi valde att lägga fokus på hur kultur måste leva fritt från politikers klåfingrihet, och att det inte är upp till politiker att bestämma vad som är fin respektive ful kultur. Sen drog jag tillbaka till puben och satt och skrev på hotellrummet halva natten, full och manisk, tills vi hade en någorlunda bra text till affischen.
Och det är där någonstans historien slutade.
Det är en del som undrat varför så stora delar av processen ägde rum bakom lyckta dörrar. Fram till det att vi hade ett i princip sista utkast var det bara jag, emma och Magnus som hade sett det, varefter jag visade upp det för en piratfika i Stockholm och tog emot feedback. Vi visade den sedan för Ung Pirats förbundsordförande Elin Andersson och, när han blev vald till rollen som vice partiledare, Mab. emma visade sedan upp den för sin arbetsplats (en massa PR-människor) och tog emot feedback, och vi upprepade samma process på piratölen i Lund. Under hela den här tiden fick inte ens partistyrelsen någon inblick, utan hade valt att förlita sig helt på att vi som grupp skulle göra ett bra jobb.
Svaret är dels att detta krävs för att få någon vettig arbetsro, och dels att material ofta blir sämre ju fler som lägger sig i. Det är otroligt svårt att jobba med något när andra ständigt kommenterar minsta lilla sak. Som skribent arbetar jag i princip uteslutande själv, och jag har väldigt svårt för att ta till mig kritik när det handlar om skönlitterär text (jag lät inte någon läsa min bok Home förrän den gått på tryck).
Det är förstås inte alltid smart – man måste få feedback. Men feedback hanteras bäst i mindre grupper. Vi började därför i en trio, och expanderade därefter successivt tills vi fått ganska mycket feedback och ändrat en hel del därefter. När vi var nöjda skickade vi allt på tryck, för att sedan presentera det när det redan var färdigt och vi inte hade någon chans att vända oss om.
Jag var rentav kritisk mot att vi skulle visa upp materialet digitalt innan det kunde köras ut, även om det redan var tryckt. Det enda som övertalade mig var att vi ville lansera det under Almedalsveckan, vilket tvingade oss att samtidigt visa upp det digitalt när alla ville se det.
Som redan sagt, materialet är tryckt och har börjat sättas upp i Visby, mig veterligen ingen annanstans. Under torsdagen har jag ett möte med mlg, som driver Piratshoppen som ska distribuera materialet. Vi kommer att göra dels aktivistkit, dels funktionärskit, där bägge kan beställas hem utan någon kostnad (inte ens frakt). Aktivistkit räknas räcka för en aktivist som delar ut och affischerar, medan funktionärskit är större och ska räcka för exempelvis ett helt bokbord för en grupp aktivister, eller att räcka för en hel lokalavdelning under ett antal aktiviteter. Under mötet med mlg ska vi bestämma mer exakt vad kiten ska innehålla, samt börja på en text som ska följa med och ge tips om hur materialet kan användas.
För er som bor i Stockholm, eller är villiga att åka till Stockholm, finns material till hands redan nu. Pinga mig på email@example.com, så kan du komma till partiets kansli och hämta upp en bunt. Ni som inte kan komma hit får vänta tills kiten är färdiga, vilket räknas vara i början av nästa vecka.
Frågor? Kommentarer? Tankar? Hör av dig! Kommentera här eller maila på firstname.lastname@example.org. Responsen vi fått hittills har varit överväldigande positiv, vilket förstås är hur kul som helst, men har du några tankar, positiva eller negativa, är du välkommen att höra av dig.
Till nästa gång vi hörs, ha ett fantastiskt liv.
Anton Nordenfur, partisekreterare Piratpartiet
Kl 18 i Baresso Coffee i Södermalm. I vanlig ordning har vi piratfika andra onsdagen i månaden. Vi låter inte sommaren hejda oss! Baresso Coffee Swedenborgsgatan 25 Tunnelbana: Medborgarplatsen eller Mariatorget Pendeltåg: Södra Station. Piratfikat är ett tillfälle att utbyta idéer och funderingar, ställa frågor och ha roliga diskussioner över en kopp kaffe. Både medlemmar och icke medlemmar är lika välkomna.
Mats Philipson, ordförande.
Glöm inte piratfikat nu på onsdag kl 18 i Baresso Coffee i Södermalm.
Piratfikat är ett tillfälle att utbyta idéer och funderingar, ställa frågor och ha roliga diskussioner över en kopp kaffe. Både medlemmar och icke medlemmar är lika välkomna. Den här onsdagen kommer även några medlemmar from nya styrelsen i Stockholms kommun och län att vara på plats.
Tunnelbana: Medborgarplatsen eller Mariatorget
Pendeltåg: Södra Station
Vi ses där