schizoidman@lemmy.zip to Privacy@lemmy.mlEnglish · 1 天前Chat Control isn’t dead, Denmark has a new proposal − here’s all we knowwww.techradar.comexternal-linkmessage-square41fedilinkarrow-up1231arrow-down12file-textcross-posted to: technology@lemmy.worldeurope@feddit.org
arrow-up1229arrow-down1external-linkChat Control isn’t dead, Denmark has a new proposal − here’s all we knowwww.techradar.comschizoidman@lemmy.zip to Privacy@lemmy.mlEnglish · 1 天前message-square41fedilinkfile-textcross-posted to: technology@lemmy.worldeurope@feddit.org
minus-squareJoe@discuss.tchncs.delinkfedilinkarrow-up5·16 小时前True, but the EU member states are members of it, and while complicated, ECHR rulings are generally respected by members and the EU. Why make things simple, right? :-)
minus-squareijon_the_human@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up2·15 小时前Again, they they are completely different organizations. It’s not a question of simplicity or complexity. The ECHR looks to address human rights issues with the cooperation of its 46 member states. The EU is (mostly) a trade union comprising of 27 member states. The UN, NATO, and WTO also have many European member states and again are different organizations.
minus-squareJoe@discuss.tchncs.delinkfedilinkarrow-up3·15 小时前You made your point, and it was clearly understood the first time. Perhaps you don’t understand my point?
True, but the EU member states are members of it, and while complicated, ECHR rulings are generally respected by members and the EU. Why make things simple, right? :-)
Again, they they are completely different organizations. It’s not a question of simplicity or complexity.
The ECHR looks to address human rights issues with the cooperation of its 46 member states.
The EU is (mostly) a trade union comprising of 27 member states.
The UN, NATO, and WTO also have many European member states and again are different organizations.
You made your point, and it was clearly understood the first time. Perhaps you don’t understand my point?