Skip to content

Switzerland plans surveillance worse than US

Technology
89 60 18
  • It's still an old nation-state with laws made in the olden day when you had to compromise.

    What democracy does not rely on compromise?

    None. I'm using "compromise" here in the sense of compromising between democracy and elites, with the world order normal 200 years ago. Today those compromises don't work because of technological progress and different makeup of societies.

    Just like those in the USA.

  • This would be catastrophic to Proton AG

    In their AI announcement yesterday they mentioned that they are moving to the EU because of legal protections.

  • So. Switzerland doesn't really have fully direct democracy in the necessary sense.

    Yes, it's half-direct, who said otherwise? Fully direct on a Nation state level would maybe be possible now with the Internet.
    But we can still overrule them, while germans get tired of their politicians lying on elections and doing what they want. Doesn't mean they don't try here.

    But yeah, this system has it's weaknesses with complicated or emotional topics. But then again, we are all humans.

    Fully direct on a Nation state level would maybe be possible now with the Internet.

    That's my point. It might seem dangerous to rely on the Internet for such basic matters, but it's already being used to great effect to undermine all democracies. So there's no choice, it's like an arms race. (Still, probably for elections it'd make sense to have a countrywide parallel intranet, so that someone's error in setting up a BGP router wouldn't disrupt it.).

    But yeah, this system has it’s weaknesses with complicated or emotional topics. But then again, we are all humans.

    That's the other side of the problem - modern easiness of propaganda.

    OK, I live in Russia, just rather sad to see how many other countries are slowly drifting in the same regrettable unsavory direction.

  • You've not heard of shady banking, Nazi gold, reluctance to stop dealing with Russia, women not being able to vote until the 70s, and Nestle?

    Switzerland gets aggressively simped for online, and there's certainly some nice things about them, but there's also some pretty awful things.

    I think someone like you, Grand Nagus, would admire the Swiss over most of that 😉

  • This is not law yet. The Federal Council (the executive) has started a consultation process at the beginning of the year which ended in May. They are now looking at all the feedback that came in, that was - unsurprisingly - exclusively negative from all sides. If the responsible minister wants to go ahead with it, it goes to the Federal Council for a vote. If they approve it, this would be a decree to change an existing decree and that would come into effect next year or the year after.

    And this is where direct democracy comes in: If this is the case anyone can start getting signatures for a public initiative which would change the constitution to prohibit such practices. In fact anyone can start doing that now. If it succeeds, then it'll come to a popular vote. Threema (a secure chat provider) has already announced that they would do that and I'm sure that they wouldn't be the only ones to band together in this.

    The process might take long, but this is in no way "not good enough to counter a campaign for legal change with a goal" and in fact has happened multiple times in the past. Hence why Switzerland has a direct vote on issues every few months because of something called "Referendum", whereby a popular vote can be forced on an issue passing through parliament. I might have my criticisms of the political system, but this ain't it.

    its system encourages it to have politicians as a thing

    Well yes, there is some level of representation, so over 8 million people don't have to decide every little detail on 1000s of changes of law. The system is built upon a "milita" system. I.e. politicians usually have a job. So people have the possibility to vote in experts or their vicinity and know that they won't solely be career politicians. Unfortunately the laws around financing and propaganda are rather lax, giving an advantage to the rich, which leads to an over-representation of the capitalist class with occupations such as lawyers and business-owners and a clear under-representation of classical working-class jobs such as craftspeople or office workers. This is amendable though to correct the mismatch, if people realize their class interest and don't fall for the same right-wing propaganda of a party whose playbook has been inspired by the US GOP for decades and who is inspiring Germany's AfD now.

    The main downside of the system imo has to do with people with no knowledge on an issue having to weigh in on them and therefore how powerful propaganda campaigns can be, which means that money buys power, as in every other existing so-called democracy - direct or not. Especially with how money shifts power away from the populace, this is inherent to capitalistic systems and it would be on the populace to protect itself from it. With enough propaganda though, people keep voting for more power of capital unbeknownst to them or not, just as they might vote against their interests on other things. The fact that you have to convince so many people, who hopefully do have some degree of education, makes it a lot harder though, for big capitalists to reach their goals, compared to less direct systems. And I know of several examples, how such a vote did not go in favor of big capital. What usually makes the difference is whether they succeed in portraying their advantage as the advantage of all.

    Yeah, so the difference in what I'd like from what you describe as existing is:

    The representation should be spread thinner over the population, and with separate organs voting on separate kinds of matters. Ideally so that most of the population would have some short experience in participating in at least one of those organs by reaching the age of 30. Experience is needed to make your last paragraph less problematic, and wide participation - to gain that experience first-hand and also to make it very expensive to blackmail\bribe\threaten enough people. This might also make a referendum an event a bit more rare, because it won't come to that.

    In general it's very cool that such a system even exists as a proof that nothing is impractical about it.

  • You've not heard of shady banking, Nazi gold, reluctance to stop dealing with Russia, women not being able to vote until the 70s, and Nestle?

    Switzerland gets aggressively simped for online, and there's certainly some nice things about them, but there's also some pretty awful things.

    Those are all very bad, but on the other hand their flag is a big plus.

  • Yeah, so the difference in what I'd like from what you describe as existing is:

    The representation should be spread thinner over the population, and with separate organs voting on separate kinds of matters. Ideally so that most of the population would have some short experience in participating in at least one of those organs by reaching the age of 30. Experience is needed to make your last paragraph less problematic, and wide participation - to gain that experience first-hand and also to make it very expensive to blackmail\bribe\threaten enough people. This might also make a referendum an event a bit more rare, because it won't come to that.

    In general it's very cool that such a system even exists as a proof that nothing is impractical about it.

    There do exist things resembling that a bit. Usually done on the local level and mostly concerning some street/development design, where people are invited to actively participate in a workshop style event with experts and vote on the results. But yes, these are not mandates. And as soon as you go onto the state or federal level, such structures become virtually non-existent.

    The others are parliamentary commissions which can be instated by parliament and are formed of mainly external experts around a certain issue. These are often used on state and federal levels of government.

    I would love if representation was spread wider over the population and that involvement was higher. I also am baffled at how bad general civics education is here in school, especially at the obligatory level. I would welcome a far more detailed and engaging civics education where they could already get some experience right at the school. Or go and participate at some local event. This way they also see the importance of a truly democratic process. Alas, as long as they can't vote, nobody seems to want their opinions.

    Another part that needs addressing is finances. There's a lot of intransparency yes, but the way it works now, it is also very hard to get your message across without being big in a main political party or having some big private sponsor. Which limits your actual freedom before and after you're elected. If we're thinking radical we might severely limit campaign budgets or think about public funds allowing the same restrictive scope for everyone, no matter their background and finances. This would also limit the imbalance in outreach between capital-backed candidates and others.

    A third huge problem lies within the judiciary, where judges on many levels effectively also have to be party-associated to get elected. If that sounds completely compromising their necessary impartiality, yeah, it's because it does. (Although I don't have data on how that influences their work)

    And lastly: The structures of accountability for politicians. I know that some steadiness or stability is necessary, but without the fear of accountability, far too many misuse their positions without repercussions. As we see from around the world, this invites more and more brazen figures to do more and more brazen violations. Just a brain-fart: 100k signatures to force a vote on relieving someone of their immunity so they can be tried in court. And to not just wait it out. Right now, it's parliament that has this exclusive possibility.

  • You've not heard of shady banking, Nazi gold, reluctance to stop dealing with Russia, women not being able to vote until the 70s, and Nestle?

    Switzerland gets aggressively simped for online, and there's certainly some nice things about them, but there's also some pretty awful things.

    Yeah, the whole "private banking" history thing the EFF seems to lionize in the article was 100% just for serving lucrative international robber barrons and other criminals. It was never about protecting regular citizens privacy.

  • You've not heard of shady banking, Nazi gold, reluctance to stop dealing with Russia, women not being able to vote until the 70s, and Nestle?

    Switzerland gets aggressively simped for online, and there's certainly some nice things about them, but there's also some pretty awful things.

    Reluctance to stop dealing with Russia is a single positive in the list.

  • Those are all very bad, but on the other hand their flag is a big plus.

    It's also a big red flag.

  • The proposed update to Switzerland’s Ordinance on the Surveillance of Postal and Telecommunications Traffic (VÜPF: Verordnung über die Überwachung des Post- und Fernmeldeverkehrs) represents a significant expansion of state surveillance powers, worse than the surveillance powers of the USA.** If enacted, it would have serious consequences for encrypted services such as Threema, an encrypted WhatsApp alternative and Proton Mail as well as VPN providers based in Switzerland.**

    Ah, yes. The country that formerly let you have anonymous secret bank accounts.

  • Those are all very bad, but on the other hand their flag is a big plus.

    But on the minus side, it's a cross

  • The proposed update to Switzerland’s Ordinance on the Surveillance of Postal and Telecommunications Traffic (VÜPF: Verordnung über die Überwachung des Post- und Fernmeldeverkehrs) represents a significant expansion of state surveillance powers, worse than the surveillance powers of the USA.** If enacted, it would have serious consequences for encrypted services such as Threema, an encrypted WhatsApp alternative and Proton Mail as well as VPN providers based in Switzerland.**

    Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

    Everything goes to shit.

    Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

    Switch to Proton Switch to Proton Switch to Proton Switch to Proton Switch to Proton Switch to Proton

    Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

    Its always the next thing, and the next thing and the next thing. What's the new proton everyone will annoy the fuck out of us with?

    This is why I stopped giving a shit. Actually. I do give a shit. I will let them surveil all of my shits, and garbage, and vomit.

  • The proposed update to Switzerland’s Ordinance on the Surveillance of Postal and Telecommunications Traffic (VÜPF: Verordnung über die Überwachung des Post- und Fernmeldeverkehrs) represents a significant expansion of state surveillance powers, worse than the surveillance powers of the USA.** If enacted, it would have serious consequences for encrypted services such as Threema, an encrypted WhatsApp alternative and Proton Mail as well as VPN providers based in Switzerland.**

    I know this and i know that political systems in Switzerland are really unique. I think this kind of thing can pass despite the robust involvement of the civil society, mostly because it's an update on a preexisting law. But this is something I can't tell as of now.

  • You've not heard of shady banking, Nazi gold, reluctance to stop dealing with Russia, women not being able to vote until the 70s, and Nestle?

    Switzerland gets aggressively simped for online, and there's certainly some nice things about them, but there's also some pretty awful things.

    My theory is that if you're cute you're socially protected and the same applies to states and countries. Switzerland is quite the nice place and there are cultural hubs of historical importance, so it has the cute look now doesn't it.

  • You've not heard of shady banking, Nazi gold, reluctance to stop dealing with Russia, women not being able to vote until the 70s, and Nestle?

    Switzerland gets aggressively simped for online, and there's certainly some nice things about them, but there's also some pretty awful things.

    Hold up now! I'll have you know in some parts of the country women couldn't vote until the 90s! Also unmarried cohabitation was illegal in some cantons until the 80s and paternity leave as a concept only exists in Switzerland since the 00s.

  • The proposed update to Switzerland’s Ordinance on the Surveillance of Postal and Telecommunications Traffic (VÜPF: Verordnung über die Überwachung des Post- und Fernmeldeverkehrs) represents a significant expansion of state surveillance powers, worse than the surveillance powers of the USA.** If enacted, it would have serious consequences for encrypted services such as Threema, an encrypted WhatsApp alternative and Proton Mail as well as VPN providers based in Switzerland.**

    Considering that we might have a World War III or 2nd American Civil War in a decade or two, it would be foolish of Switzerland to not permit encrypted VPN. A stable neutrality is very profitable in a world of uncertainty.

  • The proposed update to Switzerland’s Ordinance on the Surveillance of Postal and Telecommunications Traffic (VÜPF: Verordnung über die Überwachung des Post- und Fernmeldeverkehrs) represents a significant expansion of state surveillance powers, worse than the surveillance powers of the USA.** If enacted, it would have serious consequences for encrypted services such as Threema, an encrypted WhatsApp alternative and Proton Mail as well as VPN providers based in Switzerland.**

    Isnt Switzerland the country that struggled with their covid response because of the direct democracy requirements lacking provisions for such changes...amazing they can figure everything out to hurt the public.

  • Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

    Everything goes to shit.

    Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

    Switch to Proton Switch to Proton Switch to Proton Switch to Proton Switch to Proton Switch to Proton

    Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

    Its always the next thing, and the next thing and the next thing. What's the new proton everyone will annoy the fuck out of us with?

    This is why I stopped giving a shit. Actually. I do give a shit. I will let them surveil all of my shits, and garbage, and vomit.

    proton is currently moving their infrastructure out of switzerland because of this bullshit, so no reason to lose your cool

  • Ah, yes. The country that formerly let you have anonymous secret bank accounts.

    You account is anonymous only if you have over a billion.

  • UK government seeks way out of clash with US over Apple encryption

    Technology technology
    1
    19 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    7 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Ex-Google CEO: Power Grid Crisis Could Kill AI's Next Big Leap

    Technology technology
    20
    1
    115 Stimmen
    20 Beiträge
    172 Aufrufe
    S
    Our CPUs and GPUs are many orders of magnitude simpler than our brains. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/100-trillion-connections/ But I largely agree! We need to optimize software. OTOH, some of the smartest people in IT have been working on this, who are we to second guess them.
  • Samsung to buy US healthcare services company Xealth

    Technology technology
    1
    25 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    14 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • The Complete History of Honda Acty: From Classic to Contemporary

    Technology technology
    1
    2
    1 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    14 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Could Windows and installed apps upload all my personal files?

    Technology technology
    2
    1 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    21 Aufrufe
    rikudou@lemmings.worldR
    Yes, every application has access to everything. The only exception are those weird apps that use the universal framework or whatever that thing is called, those need to ask for permissions. But most of the apps on your PC have full access to everything. And Windows does collect and upload a lot of personal information and they could easily upload everything on your system. The same of course applies for the apps as well, they have access to everything except privileged folders (those usually don't contain your personal data, but system files).
  • 1k Stimmen
    95 Beiträge
    374 Aufrufe
    G
    Obviously the law must be simple enough to follow so that for Jim’s furniture shop is not a problem nor a too high cost to respect it, but it must be clear that if you break it you can cease to exist as company. I think this may be the root of our disagreement, I do not believe that there is any law making body today that is capable of an elegantly simple law. I could be too naive, but I think it is possible. We also definitely have a difference on opinion when it comes to the severity of the infraction, in my mind, while privacy is important, it should not have the same level of punishments associated with it when compared to something on the level of poisoning water ways; I think that a privacy law should hurt but be able to be learned from while in the poison case it should result in the bankruptcy of a company. The severity is directly proportional to the number of people affected. If you violate the privacy of 200 million people is the same that you poison the water of 10 people. And while with the poisoning scenario it could be better to jail the responsible people (for a very, very long time) and let the company survive to clean the water, once your privacy is violated there is no way back, a company could not fix it. The issue we find ourselves with today is that the aggregate of all privacy breaches makes it harmful to the people, but with a sizeable enough fine, I find it hard to believe that there would be major or lasting damage. So how much money your privacy it's worth ? 6 For this reason I don’t think it is wise to write laws that will bankrupt a company off of one infraction which was not directly or indirectly harmful to the physical well being of the people: and I am using indirectly a little bit more strict than I would like to since as I said before, the aggregate of all the information is harmful. The point is that the goal is not to bankrupt companies but to have them behave right. The penalty associated to every law IS the tool that make you respect the law. And it must be so high that you don't want to break the law. I would have to look into the laws in question, but on a surface level I think that any company should be subjected to the same baseline privacy laws, so if there isn’t anything screwy within the law that apple, Google, and Facebook are ignoring, I think it should apply to them. Trust me on this one, direct experience payment processors have a lot more rules to follow to be able to work. I do not want jail time for the CEO by default but he need to know that he will pay personally if the company break the law, it is the only way to make him run the company being sure that it follow the laws. For some reason I don’t have my usual cynicism when it comes to this issue. I think that the magnitude of loses that vested interests have in these companies would make it so that companies would police themselves for fear of losing profits. That being said I wouldn’t be opposed to some form of personal accountability on corporate leadership, but I fear that they will just end up finding a way to create a scapegoat everytime. It is not cynicism. I simply think that a huge fine to a single person (the CEO for example) is useless since it too easy to avoid and if it really huge realistically it would be never paid anyway so nothing usefull since the net worth of this kind of people is only on the paper. So if you slap a 100 billion file to Musk he will never pay because he has not the money to pay even if technically he is worth way more than that. Jail time instead is something that even Musk can experience. In general I like laws that are as objective as possible, I think that a privacy law should be written so that it is very objectively overbearing, but that has a smaller fine associated with it. This way the law is very clear on right and wrong, while also giving the businesses time and incentive to change their practices without having to sink large amount of expenses into lawyers to review every minute detail, which is the logical conclusion of the one infraction bankrupt system that you seem to be supporting. Then you write a law that explicitally state what you can do and what is not allowed is forbidden by default.
  • 880 Stimmen
    356 Beiträge
    2k Aufrufe
    communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyzC
    Is that useful for completing tasks?
  • 19 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    37 Aufrufe
    J
    This is why they are businessmen and not politicians or influencers