- It's not fully passed. While the parliament has approved it, the Council has yet to do so. It may fall there (though, unlikely)
- As it's a directive, it then needs to be passed into law in each member state. I will be arguing and campaigning in my country to ensure that strong anti-abuse measures are included in that phase. It will provide *some* protections.
- The filter-everything model -- according to some -- violates the provisions of the #GDPR, and maybe even go against one or more of Arcticles 7, 8, 10, 11 and 12 of the Charter Fundamental Rights (covering privacy, speech and association -- Article 9 covers freedom to marry, and is probably not involved...).
My prediction: it will eventually be ruled illegal by the EU courts, like the data-retention directive, but only after some damage has been caused.
Other than those of us who care about the intersection of rights and technology, I see no one else caring too much about it, TBH.
That issue report suggests to me that Pale Moon is one of those organisations that love "open source" because they don't have to do all the development work, just reap the benefits.
The triumvir Marcus Licinius Crassus (115BC-53BC) is thought to have been the richest man in the world at the time.
He built that wealth not by being nice. Rather, he was exploitative, rapacious and as devious a business and political player as is possible.
I doubt he was the first to be so.
It continues to amaze me that after literally 1000s of years of legitimised greed in the guise of "business" -- resulting the figurative and literal destruction of innocent lives -- there are people who believe the notion that allowing "business" a free reign in all matters would make society better.
Franky, the history makes me doubt the bona fides of anyone who asserts this position.