Dane here. I don’t know what Peter Hummelgaard’s major malfunction is, but at this point I’d like to see his personal finances audited by the PET to ensure that he’s not subject to any undue outside influence.
Maybe throw in a psychiatric evaluation too, because having a multi-year erection over violating other people’s privacy can’t be fucking normal.
I guess politicians like that just exist. We had Ursula von der Leyen for that. She was big time into internet surveillance and censorship before proceeding to other endeavours, defence and then president of the european commission. Her list of controversies, shady contracts and deals and investigations is pretty long. So yeah, I’d say there’s likely something shady going on in the background with those people. But investigating them doesn’t seem to do anything, at least not in Germany. That just makes them become president of something or similar things.
Sure. As if there was a difference between a dystopian surveillance state based on a voluntary effort or basing it on mandatory surveillance. The effects are the same, no matter why someone does it. Also, why would we tell Google to voluntarily invade people’s privacy? That’s already their business model. I don’t think we need laws for that.
