Brazil is a dictatorship in disguise. Supreme court is the executive branch. There is no law the court can do anything it wants, arrest anyone for any reason. There is no expiry date for their term.
As a Brazilian I can’t see a future where the people win. It’s not even close it’s full control and all of the power is concentrated in the government upper branch.
The system is designed to keep them in power there is nothing that can be done just leave the country
I'm not from Brazil, so I'm curious if you're saying the court broke some law by imposing house arrest on Bolsonaro? This part of the article makes it seem like it was done pretty legally.
> In a statement, Federal Police said it executed a preventive arrest warrant
> that had been requested by the police themselves and authorized by the
> Supreme Court, CNN affiliate CNN Brasil reported.
Not the person you are responding to, but just as an FYI: in Brazil right now there are certain groups attempting to stamp political motivation on the decisions of the upper judiciary and discredit its impartiality and capacity to judge.
The reason most of these politicians and alies are acting like this is fear.
See what they just tried to vote a couple of months ago:
The popular name of this amendment should tell you everything you need to know about its purpose.
There were several large protests before the vote on the Senate, and before it was eventually ruled unconstitutional by a commission from the Senate.
It is also important to note members of Congress and Senate already have a certain level of immunity in Brazil and can only be judged by the Supreme Federal Court, and this would further restrict the ability of the judiciary branch to give sentences to politicians convicted of any serious wrongdoing.
Last, but not least, I can tell you that you quoting the CNN article would probably ruffle some feathers from (most of) the same ones questioning the Supreme Court. I speak from experience.
"Certain groups" are ruining the court's impartiality by pointing out the fact it has been investigating, prosecuting, judging and executing made up crimes against themselves since at least 2019?
Judge straight up comes out to the public and brags about how they all personally defeated Bolsonaro? Same guy who's implicated in the USAID nonsense? And you make it out to be a conspiracy theory?
The "shielding" law is absolute nonsense yet I can't even fault them for trying. What else are you supposed to do when you have a supreme court that has essentially usurped all power?
It names the FEDERAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE as the author, not the Supreme Court.
> And you make it out to be a conspiracy theory?
I did not say this and I was not trying to imply a conspiracy in what I said, only that this is a blatant attempt from the Congress to protect their own interests.
It is not a conspiracy when Congress members like Nikolas Ferreira say things like:
'' If any Member of Parliament commits a crime, they will go to jail. This House just needs to say "yes." ''
Which means the Congress now will be the final judge, overriding the Supreme Court (via secret voting, btw).
> Judge straight up comes out to the public and brags about how they all personally defeated Bolsonaro? Same guy who's implicated in the USAID nonsense? And you make it out to be a conspiracy theory?
FYI, I was not taking about Bolsonaro.
Again, 30 seconds of Google and I can find not only what are you taking about USAID (Musk accusing USAID of interfering in the Brazilian election) but the fact that this is most likely false and has no basis whatsoever.
A claim requires evidence, and as far as the evidence goes it is pretty much all there is.
For the other claims, it is a matter of opinion. I don't see it that way.
> I'm tired, man.
I think, in a sense, everyone is.
The question you need to ask youself is: what are you fighting for?
My suggestion is for you to consider everything Bolsonaro says and stands for and ask youself: is he really standing for democracy? Are the judges in the way of someone that stands for democracy?
If your answer is yes, then we have a fundamental disagreement and from this point on we can only agree to disagree.
As you can see, there is absolutely nothing wrong with anything that was claimed.
> this is a blatant attempt from the Congress to protect their own interests
That's not what you said. You said "certain groups" are trying to undermine the non-existent impartiality of the supreme court. They've been doing an excellent job at destroying it all by themselves.
As to your claim that congress is blatantly trying to protect itself, we're not in disagreement. I even said so in my original comment. I don't agree with that asinine "shielding" law at all.
I merely expressed sympathy towards their reasons for doing so. The only reason the supreme court hasn't straight up dissolved congress is they need it to exist so this country can have a veneer of democracy.
Here's a notable episode: our current president and his ministers have been on a taxation spree since he took office; at some point our elected congress started blocking their attempts to raise taxes on us; the supreme court suddenly swoops in and overrides our elected congress on this matter, giving the president what he wants.
The only reason the supreme court hasn't dissolved congress is they still need it to exist so this country can have a veneer of democracy.
> Musk accusing USAID of interfering in the Brazilian election
Not Musk. Accusations come from Mike Benz, former US State Department official.
This aligns with my own memories of the 2022 election. I stopped trusting the voting machines when I saw Biden's top CIA official tell Bolsonaro to stop questioning them.
> what are you fighting for?
At this point? My own sanity.
This country is hopeless, it can't be fixed. Nevertheless I can't remain silent in these discussions because I feel like I'm being gaslit.
> Are the judges in the way of someone that stands for democracy?
The judges are themselves against democracy. My position is they have themselves pulled off a silent coup and are now running the country monocratically.
Whatever Bolsonaro plotted to do is mostly irrelevant when faced with this. If anything it'd be a counter-coup.
> That's not what you said. You said "certain groups" are trying to undermine the non-existent impartiality of the supreme court.
I said they were trying to "stamp political motivation on on the decisions of the upper judiciary".
IOW, to label them as politically motivated.
I wouldn't call it a conspiracy since these groups have been pretty vocal about it.
By "certain groups" I meant "some political parties, politicians and associates", though I'm not comfortable defining it further since I don't have exact references ATM.
> As you can see, there is absolutely nothing wrong with anything that was claimed.
This is a different inquiry, check the numbers.
> Whatever Bolsonaro plotted to do is mostly irrelevant when faced with this. If anything it'd be a counter-coup.
It's not necessary to "label" anything. They have publicly confessed. One of the judges went to a public event and bragged about it in public. "We defeated Bolsonarism!" were his exact words.
You cannot possibly witness that and then continue believing in the so called impartiality of the court.
He's been regretting those words ever since for obvious reasons. He's even resigned from his position.
There's no need to debate this further. I could enumerate even more examples of impartiality and persecution, but if a judge publicly bragging about persecuting a political candidate fails to convince, what's the point?
You are dressing the events in your interpretation and stating them as truth.
The events you mention above are cherry-picked bits of information to support what you have said from the beginning.
For instance, in what you said above: you are quoting an excerpt of Barroso's comments from 2023 about democracy (not his exact words) without the actual context, something he even clarified later on as it was picked up by the media. Also, his resignation now, 2 years later, has nothing to do with any of this - looks like he was just tired.
I don't blame him. To be honest, now I'm tired as well.
> You are dressing the events in your interpretation and stating them as truth.
That's how a discussion works. I state what I believe in, and people will either agree or post counterpoints. If I'm wrong then I won't be able to argue otherwise. Testing my ideas is the whole point.
Just for the record, even leftist columnists agree with me.
They admit that the supreme court is out of control. They just think it's okay because they're currently persecuting their political enemies. Now that the court has served its purpose, it's time for things to go back to normal. Just like that.
Their motives are transparent, as are their political maneuvers. It's the intellectual dishonesty that disgusts me.
The brazilian supreme court has been breaking the law and relentlessly usurping power for years now.
It began in 2019 when some magazine ran a damning article on one of these judges. In response to that they launched a "fake news" inquisition where they were the victims, investigators, prosecutors, judges and executioners against unspecified persons for wildcard crimes covering the whole brazilian territory. Thus began the escalating abuses of the court.
The "fake news" inquisition was eventually repurposed for political censorship when Bolsonaro was up for reelection. Political censorship is explicitly unconstitutional, by the way.
It's pretty ironic to watch them condemn Bolsonaro for a coup attempt. Their own coup was quite successful.
As a Brazilian, I'm seeing a lot of people happy and thinking the justice system finally is working like it was supposed to. Some people are complaining they are being a bit harsh but better a harsh justice system than what we had in the past.
Fairly accurate representation of the status quo. The decisions of the unelected supreme court are 100% political and monocratic. This country is a dictatorship of the judiciary.
Kind of an odd conclusion to take from a weird question.
I would not subject myself or my property to a foreign court system for various reasons, but first and foremost because I'm not subject to their laws.
If I'm on Brazilian territory or doing business in Brazil, however, the question is equally pointless: barring certain exceptions, you are subject to the Brazilian laws to the extent of your presence in the country - period. You have no choice on this matter.
Courts are fallible and that's why you have levels, due process, and presumption of innocence. The Brazilian system is not perfect and it's slow but you cannot say the American system is much better when comparing decisions at same court level.
"first and foremost because I'm not subject to their laws"
People often shop for good jurisdictions when founding companies or even concluding contracts which need an arbitration clause. Countries which have a reputation for quick and neutral justice tend to attract foreigners for this purpose. In Europe, either UK or the Netherlands are on the top of this ladder.
IDK where precisely Brazil stands on this ladder. They seem to attract quite a lot of FDI, so maybe not as bad as the GP said.
This wasn't clear for me from the question, though I understand where you are coming from.
Investing is certainly not as risky as people from outside of Brazil generally think it is, since the banking system is well regulated and the legal framework is solid.
My two cents: if someone that is a foreigner in both Brazil and the US asked me what I think, I would say investing is Brazil is likely less risky than the US at the moment.
> There is no law the court can do anything it wants, arrest anyone for any reason. There is no expiry date for their term.
The judiciary does not write the laws, only applies them.
I'm quite sure that removing a tracking bracelet and trying to flee is against the law.
While it's true that the judiciary holds lots of weight in Brazil, let's not forget that different branches fighting over their boundaries is the norm in any functioning government and democracy.
We're merely more used to the judiciary bending to the executive, Brazil's an exception on this.
> The judiciary does not write the laws, only applies them.
The Magnitsky sanctioned judge is known to have made "suggestions" to our elected representatives regarding the "fake news" censorship laws that were proposed years ago. Our lawmakers rejected that law, and the courts abused their power to ram the regulations down our throats anyway via their own "resolutions".
Brazilian judiciary is ripe with "activist" judges. Every single act of "judicial activism" is a coup against the brazilian population. Not a single brazilian voted for these judges.
From the dialogues in the pictures it doesn’t sound like they are using anyones emails for training. The messaging indicates it’s more like using as context and/or generating embeddings for RAG. Unless there’s something else I’m not aware of.
I know that Google does a lot of bad stuff but we don’t need to make up stuff they just aren’t doing
This doomsday messaging an alarmism is only serves to degrade the whole cause
edit: and before someone say that they also don’t want that then let’s criticize it for what it is (opting users to feature without consent). We don’t need to make stuff up, it really doesn’t help.
>When smart features are on, your data may be used to improve these features. Across Google and Workspace, we’ve long shared robust privacy commitments that outline how we protect user data and prioritize privacy. Generative AI doesn’t change these commitments — it actually reaffirms their importance. Learn how Gemini in Gmail, Chat, Docs, Drive, Sheets, Slides, Meet & Vids protects your data.
When I click "Learn more" in toggling the smart features on/off
It may not do it now, but I really don't like the implications. Especially a tone of "it's not actually bad, it's good!"
"Your data stays in Workspace. We do not use your Workspace data to train or improve the underlying generative AI and large language models that power Gemini, Search, and other systems outside of Workspace without permission."
But then if the terms include a vague permission and/or license to use the data for improving the results, the text is factually correct while obscuring the fact that they do in fact solicit your permission and thus use the data, with your permission.
Discovering new settings that I was opted in to without being asked does not scream good faith.
Separately, their help docs are gibberish. They must use this phrase 20 times: "content is not used for training generative AI models outside of your domain without your permission." Without telling you if that checkbox is that permission; where that permission is set; or indeed, even if that permission is set. From reading their documentation, I cannot tell if that checkbox in gmail allows using my data outside my organization or not.
Sorry, but that "doomsday" "alarmism" is exactly what is needed and warranted. But this practice of sneakily opting users in into things they don't want instead of a very clear full on pop up saying "We now use your data and private emails for AI training" is exactly the problem.
> I know that Google does a lot of bad stuff but we don’t need to make up stuff they just aren’t doing
No no. a) they ARE doing a lot of bad stuff and b) that shit ain't made up and they ARE exactly doing that. Or do you also think that Github is NOT using priI know that Google does a lot of bad stuff but we don’t need to make up stuff they just aren’t doingvate repos to train Copilot? Do you honestly and truly believe that?
If you do truly believe that I got a bunch of bridges to sell to you.
As someone from Europe, I certainly am at least equally uncomfortable with products from the US. Made in USA to me equals zero concept of privacy protection but plenty state surveillance (CLOUD Act, Cisco having hard coded back doors every two weeks etc.) and recently even lack of rule of law and even threats of annexation of European land and interference in domestic elections.
Sure, China will probably also spy and conduct industrial espionage, just as the US, but they appear to be a rational actor and have never threatened the sovereignty of European countries.
the US has a recent history of extra-terrestrial law enforcement, both in ally countries (kim dotcom, meng wanzhou), and non-ally countries (bin laden). that's the main fear. w.r.t. the US, everybody is at risk, all the time.
if you don't do anything wrong, you won't get into trouble, and out of 8 billion people in the world, only a handful of people get in trouble. the problem is, the definition of trouble can change.
Who can guarantee that the Cisco/UniFi or whatever Made in USA gear won't be a host to a state sanctioned "lawful interception software" politely pushed to many devices with the help of a National Security Letter?
Is this supposed to be some kind of gotcha? Of course this can happen. and not only I support it but I think they should do it more and use it to get a shot on any criminal or foreign power.
We can do it, but we shouldn’t expose ourselves for the possibility of our opponents doing it. That simple
I'm neither from US nor from China, so I don't belong to either "we". So in my case no hardware is safer unless I design the board and develop the firmware on top of it.
Even then, I'm not sure whether there are hardware vulnerabilities baked in.
I think it’s safe to say that by “We” we can assume it would be your country and its allies.
War and spying has been a thing for a long time now. I think it’s unreasonable to expect countries to not make use of their respective industries and enterprises to get an edge on each other.
The fact is that this kind of hardware is just very good for that so as I a costumer, I feel you and I think the best we can do is buy a custom hardware and install a custom OS. Like open-wrt.
But I will not complain of my country doing that because when I see adversaries doing it, it’s completely reasonable that it also do. In fact, game theory, mandates it.
Sometimes your own government is the most likely to spy on you.
> Yeah, the most realistic trade-off might be installing OpenWRT and some tripwires to see whether anyone is trying to do something nefarious remotely.
I agree with that, but its beyond the reach of most people.
I think zero trust or low trust within your LAN is also a good idea. So is firewalling ISP supplied routers.
If a government has a backdoor it can be exploited. What if your US made router's backdoor is discovered and abused by a Chinese party? No backdoor can be made to only exclusively be unlocked by its creator.
I do not know those countries, but in South, South East and East Asia the US is not the threat, its a potential ally against China. In most of Europe it is an important ally.
Allies to spy on each other, but they are not a threat in the way actual or potential enemies are. The fact the the US spied on Germany, and Britain spied on Belgium does not really make them threats.
It was an important ally, Europe is currently investing billions in uncoupling its reliance on both Russia (for natural resources) and the US (for defence and natural resources) because neither party can be trusted anymore.
> Europe is currently investing billions in uncoupling its reliance on both Russia (for natural resources) and the US (for defence and natural resources)
Russia, yes.
I do not see any real expectation of Europe not being reliant on the US. See the many discussion here about reliance on US cloud services. Where else are these natural resources to come from? Where is the technology or the money to scale up to what the US has?
Can you link to a source where that's demonstrated? If these devices have a backdoor surely both HN hackes and the NSA would have found it by now, right?
The same is true of any country, including the USA. Australia & the UK have laws to that effect, and the USA backdoored RSA and Juniper off the top of my head.
Unless you run purely open source, your only choice always has been which country had open slather to spy on you. There are no real contenders for open source phones right now, so for most of us guaranteed privacy was never a choice. (I have high hopes for Halium in the future, as I hate this.)
For those of us in East Asia or some country like Iran or Venezuela that the US likes to bomb periodically, China is the least objectionable spy master. Those of us in the West chose USA, as they were a reliable trusted ally. Then Trump arrived on the scene and make things complicated.
This actually uses nextcloud for its "File Storage" component. It's not a from-scratch system but a bunch of existing pieces of software all packaged together.
I think this can work well but it really really depends on if the components are chosen well and integrated with each other well.
We may joke about it, but the fact is that it's releasing dumb ideas like this that you sometimes get masterpieces. Maybe this one is really just one of the bad ones, but eventually Elon will have some good ones just like he already has.
And a lot of us would be better off releasing our dumb ideas too. The world has a lot of issues and if all you do is talk down and don't try to fix anything yourself. Maybe it's time to get off the web a little and do something else.
> “Maybe it's time to get off the web a little and do something else.”
One wishes Musk would take this advice: leave the web alone, forget for a few months about the social media popularity contest that seems to occupy his mind 24/7, and focus on rekindling his passion for rockets or roadsters or whatever middle-aged pursuit comes next.
I know the world sucks, but "fuck it, let's make it worse" is a tough sell for anybody not already onboard. You're better off just doing it, rather than trying to convince others to also do it.
Perhaps I'm working of a false narrative, but SpaceX and the methodology it uses (simplify everything and fail fast) seems to be coming directly from Elon.
He's a horrible human being but has had a couple worthy ideas.
I initially believed his early videos about how he applies the scientific process, with a spreadsheet of the BOM, optimising for specific questions and failing early and all that.
Given his later attitude when it came to careful thought, I'm no longer under the impression that these earlier expositions were his ideas at all. I suspect he got it from the engineers and used it to burnish his image. I know that certain companies, e.g
Apple, Dyson, etc have a culture of "all ideas came from the big man at the top, no matter who thought of it."
The ADL, the left-wing Jewish human rights group not aligned with Musk in the slightest, called out that Musk's gesture was merely an awkward salutation, not a Nazi seig heil[0].
The left wing Jewish human rights group isn't the arbiter of what a nazi salute is. Actual Nazis around the world took it as a nod towards their ideology, and he's desperately trying to start a civil war in the UK, so I would say it walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck.
Believe it or not, me (not white, did not grow up in the West, had the faintest clue about Nazism) used to do what you would consider a "Nazi salute" when I'd see friends and wave to them from a distance. I don't know how I picked that up but it happened.
I'm not saying that Musk is doing the same; but that one can be charitable and say he probably did not mean that. I mean, what does he stand to gain from doing so? He's a businessman.
> I mean, what does he stand to gain from doing so? He's a businessman.
I can only guess at his motives, but the salute is not an isolated case. Steve Bannon has given the same salute multiple times, so it seems coordinated.
Musk has tweeted “Only AfD can save Germany”. The founder of AfD, Björn Höcke, is a convicted nazi. The German domestic intelligence agency, BfV, says AfD is an extreme-right organization with anti-democratic ideals (“proven far-right extremist entity”)
Musk also tweeted “Free Tommy Robinson”, a UK far-right extremist activist and convicted criminal.
Musk has a history of supporting people and organizations that most other businessmen would not.
Oh you are right! I guess the site must be inferring User Agent and just presenting one download link. It looks like they have Linux, MacOS, and Windows builds.
We don't need national guard in the capitol deployed. Completely fabricated claim that crime is out of control. Absolutely a move to gain power and create internal enemies to fight while a certain list of clients is being much discussed.
the murder rate in American cities is out of control. Maybe Americans are blind to this, but there are 274 murders in DC alone in 2023. In ALL of Germany, there were something like 600 murders in 2023. DC has 730,000 people living there. Germany has 83 million people. What do you mean that DC doesnt have a crisis going on? The homicide rate is 4,500% higher than Germany, lol.
How can geemany be considered unsafe to the average american? The homicide and violent crime rate in the US is 10x higher than germany, even in the quiet and posh parts of the USA the murder rate is insanely high compared to anywhere in germany.
Nonsense. The murder rate in most of the USA is similar to Germany. My small city has literally zero murders most years. The vast majority of violent crime happens in few cities such as St. Louis, Baltimore, Chicago, and Washington DC. And then it's only in a handful of neighborhoods within those cities. We should fix those places but basic safety isn't something that most Americans have to worry about.
As a Brazilian I can’t see a future where the people win. It’s not even close it’s full control and all of the power is concentrated in the government upper branch.
The system is designed to keep them in power there is nothing that can be done just leave the country