If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties‚ subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The EU Parliament’s Industry Committee last week endorsed the new EU Digital Identity Regulation (eIDAS 2). Approved despite opposition from the Pirate group‚ the new statute will introduce a digital identity app to facilitate EU citizens’ access to diverse digital services‚ both private and public‚ and co-opt the likes of Big Tech giants such as Google or Facebook‚ and to support online transactions. While lawmakers‚ IT security specialists‚ and scientists have recently criticized the EU’s push against disinformation and have voiced their concerns about potential mass surveillance‚ the agreement was approved nonetheless. “This regulation is a blank cheque for surveillance of citizens online‚ endangering our privacy and security online‚” states Patrick Breyer‚ a Pirate Party legislator. Breyer believes the regulation allows our online identities to fall under the potential view of tech giants such as Meta‚ undermining browser security and gradually trampling on our rights to access digital services anonymously. Breyer argues that entrusting our digital lives to the government rather than Facebook or Google equates to moving from a “frying pan into the fire.” He laments the missed opportunity for the EU to create a dependable structure for modernization and digitization and commits to scrutinizing the regulation’s implementation. Critically‚ Breyer expresses concerns about the app becoming an open invitation to corner EU citizens in the digital world. Browser manufacturers could be coerced into revealing our encrypted digital activities to the government‚ attacking our right to encrypted privacy. This threat spans a potentially unsafe consolidation of personal data such as banking information‚ prescription details‚ and criminal records into an eID wallet that could be accessed via central databases‚ Breyer argues. The post EU Approves Digital ID Regulation That Forces Big Tech Companies To Support an EU Digital ID App appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties‚ subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Sign Up To Keep Reading This post is for Reclaim The Net supporters. Gain access to the entire archive of features and supporters-only content. Help protect free speech‚ freedom from surveillance‚ and digital civil liberties. Join Already a supporter? Login here The post Exposing the Invisible: How Online Advertising Is Behind Sensitive Personal Data Being Tracked and Sold Online appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties‚ subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Debanking is one of the most prominent moves against free speech to raise peoples’ attention over the last couple of years‚ and now the ACLU has taken an interest – especially now that local governments are directly calling for some entities to be financially deplatformed. While the ACLU has been rocky in its support of free speech in recent years‚ it is making an effort to support a pro-Second Amendment Group with its First Amendment rights. The partnership of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the National Rifle Association (NRA) is a rare sight to behold‚ given their divergent ideologies‚ especially regarding gun control rights. Yet‚ common ground has been found in their mutual defense of fundamental First Amendment freedoms‚ exemplified by an unexpected query by the NRA’s legal counsel. William A. Brewer III‚ in a move suggested to the New York Times‚ proposed that the ACLU should represent the NRA in its freedom of speech challenge before the Supreme Court. While this unusual alliance might perplex some‚ the ACLU and the NRA‚ according to Brewer‚ are the “800-pound gorillas” of the First and Second Amendments respectively. The strange bedfellows scenario arises from a contention between the NRA and a New York official who attempted to ostracize the association‚ an act perceived as infringing on the NRA’s First Amendment rights. If you’re a regular reader of Reclaim The Net‚ this is something you’ll be familiar with. David Cole‚ the ACLU’s national legal director‚ expressed that despite ideological differences‚ adhering to its core tenet of defending the freedom of speech‚ irrespective of the entity in question‚ was paramount. Maria Vullo‚ the official at the heart of this case‚ is alleged to have used her agency’s influence to sever the NRA’s ties with banks and insurance firms after the horrific 2018 school shooting in Florida. This pivotal lawsuit hinges on whether this course of action infringed the First Amendment. The US Court of Appeals previously sided against the NRA‚ deeming her actions to be within the perimeters of the constitution. However‚ First Amendment scholars Eugene Volokh and Brewer contend that this ruling could set a dangerous precedent‚ enabling officials to financially stifle their adversaries‚ exploiting their political ideology as a scapegoat. The case is an alarming echo of another controversy; the Biden administration has been found to be manipulating social media companies into suppressing information it perceives as “misinformation‚” sparking a debate on the constitutionality of such governmental influence. Despite witnessing a confluence of ideologies in the First Amendment crusade‚ the ACLU clarified that its backing isn’t extended to the NRA’s core mission. It primarily opposes any attempts by officials to manipulate their power to financially isolate an entity merely based on differing political beliefs. The post The ACLU Defends The NRA In First Amendment Case appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties‚ subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Despite several jokes about Al Gore inventing the internet‚ it’s clear that the former Vice President has revealed that he knows little about how the internet works – or the First Amendment‚ for that matter. Gore called for the banning of social media algorithms at the Bloomberg Green Summit at COP28. Underscoring his argument with a comparison to signature firearms‚ Gore stated that algorithms that condition the course of social media‚ similar to AR-15’s‚ represent a threat and “ought to be banned.” Gore complained that the rise of social media had “disrupted the balances that used to exist that made representative democracy work much better.” Display content from Twitter Click here to display content from Twitter. Learn more in Twitter’s privacy policy. Always display content from Twitter Open content directly “…If you have social media that is dominated by algorithms that pull people down these rabbit holes that are a bit like picture plants‚ these algorithms‚ they are the digital equivalent of AR-15s. They ought to be banned. They really ought to be banned. “It’s an abuse of the public forum‚” Gore continued. “But when people are pulled down these rabbit holes‚ you know what’s at the bottom of the rabbit hole? That’s where the echo chamber is. And if you spend too much time in the echo chamber‚ what’s weaponized is another form of ai‚ not artificial intelligence. Artificial insanity. I’m serious. I’m serious.” Social media algorithms are like digital recipe books that platforms like Facebook‚ Instagram‚ or Twitter use to decide what content to show you. When you scroll through your feed‚ these algorithms pick posts‚ pictures‚ or videos they think you’ll like‚ based on your past activity. It’s like a personal chef who remembers all your favorite meals and keeps serving them. How do these algorithms work? Imagine you’re at a giant party where everyone is shouting to be heard. The algorithm is your friend who listens to all the conversations and then tells you the ones you’d find most interesting. It pays attention to which posts you like‚ share‚ or spend time reading‚ and uses this info to guess what else you might enjoy. But politicians like Gore are pushing to ban these algorithms. This is a tricky area because it involves the First Amendment‚ which protects free speech in the US. Telling a social media platform not to use algorithms is a bit like telling an editor they can’t decide what goes on the front page. It’s seen as a form of censorship by many. The post Al Gore Likens Social Media Algorithms To AR-15s‚ Calls For a Ban appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties‚ subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Political commentator and show host Alex Jones has been reinstated on X after Elon Musk voiced his thoughts on the matter‚ declaring “Vox Populi‚ Vox Dei” and conducting a poll. Jones‚ a host on the platform Infowars‚ and now on MugClub was permanently banned from Twitter in September 2018. This decision followed a series of events‚ including a confrontational encounter with CNN reporter Oliver Darcy. In August 2018‚ during a congressional hearing on social media‚ Jones had a heated exchange with Darcy‚ accusing him of being against free speech and supporting censorship. This confrontation was livestreamed on Periscope‚ a live video streaming app owned by Twitter‚ which brought it directly under Twitter’s scrutiny. Former Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey admitted that CNN was part of the reason why Jones was banned from the platform. “…We got into a situation where suddenly a bunch of people were reporting content on our platform‚ including CNN‚ who wrote an article about all things that might violate our rules that we looked into and we gave him [Alex Jones] one of the warnings‚” Dorsey said in 2018. At the time Jones’s video with Darcy was broadcast‚ Darcy had already successfully lobbied many of the Big Tech giants to deplatform Jones and Infowars. Jones was confronting Darcy to call him out for this behavior. Jones referred to Darcy as a “rat‚” a “sociopath‚” “a possum that crawled out of the rear end of a dead cow‚” and likened him to“the Hitler Youth.” After Dorsey and Twitter’s former head of legal Vijaya Gadde explained on the Joe Rogan Experience why Jones was banned‚ Rogan found the idea that Jones was banned for confronting Darcy humorous and laughed as Gadde described the video while saying: “That’s enough [to get banned]? Really? That’s hilarious.” Elon Musk had previously expressed reluctance to reinstate Alex Jones‚ but not for any reason to do with why Jones was banned in the first place. In fact‚ Musk’s reluctance to reinstate Jones has to do with something that happened back in 2012. Jones questioned the authenticity of the Sandy Hook school massacre in which 26 lives were lost‚ the majority of which were children. Jones was successfully sued by the families of the victims. “My firstborn child died in my arms. I felt his last heartbeat. I have no mercy for anyone who would use the deaths of children for gain‚ politics or fame‚” Musk said back in 2022. Elon Musk commented on Jones being reinstated: “I vehemently disagree with what he said about Sandy Hook‚ but are we a platform that believes in freedom of speech or are we not? “That is what it comes down to in the end. If the people vote him back on‚ this will be bad for 𝕏 financially‚ but principles matter more than money.” The post Alex Jones is Reinstated on X Following Elon Musk Poll appeared first on Reclaim The Net.