The EU Is About To Destroy The Internet / Glacium

Hat tip to RdM: The EU is about to destroy the Internet.

How? A tax on internet links. The EU is going to “tax internet links to websites and online data that serve as sources for commentary and opinion.”

Only large media companies would be able to pay the taxes. Small ones would be bankrupted. I wouldn’t be able to publish links to news articles on this blog without paying the tax.

And the EU parliament is due to vote this into law in 30 days time.

I’m not surprised that the EU is doing this. The EU is all about top down control of absolutely everything. It never does anything else but introduce more and more crippling and obstructing and hampering legislation.

And now it seems that the EU has set out to destroy the internet and the multiplicity of opinions available in it, and return us to the days when just one or two large media outfits controlled the news.

Of course here in the UK we voted to leave the EU. But will we ever actually leave? I don’t think the UK political class ever wanted to leave the EU. They’ve all been wedded to it for years. And the same is true everywhere else in Europe.

As far as I can see, the UK political class has decided to just drag out the process of leaving the EU to the point where we never actually get round to leaving it. It’s been 2 years since the British people voted to leave, and as far as I can see absolutely nothing has been done about leaving. And I suspect that nothing ever will be done.

Fifty years ago, the EU (then the EEC) was something everyone wanted to join. I did too. But now, as its undemocratic and top-down-controlling nature has become more and more manifest, everyone is beginning to want to get out. Except the political class in every country in Europe, who are now all bought and paid for by the EU, and enjoying enormous perks/pensions/immunities that nobody else has.

I think the political struggle in the EU over the next 10 or 20 or 30 years is going to be the struggle of nation states to escape from the EU, in the face of EU moves to prevent anyone from escaping. Only 2 or 3 days ago I drew attention to news that the EU-bought-and-paid-for Italian President, Sergio Mattarella, had blocked the formation of a populist new government in Italy. Italians are going to have to vote again. And they may have to keep on voting until they get their vote right. EU budget commissioner, Guenther Oettinger, said that “the markets will lead Italians not to vote much longer for the populists” (although he’s apparently retracted it since).

Other links: Edri, Petition. (I tried, but email option doesn’t seem to work)

I was going to write about my idea for a Glacium today. And in future I’ll probably only be able to write about my own ideas. So don’t be too surprised if that’s all I ever talk about in future.

I got the idea for a Glacium (right, click to enlarge) this morning, over my first cup of tea, and my first cigarette. I’m currently building a computer simulation model of a geological column extending from the surface of the Earth to its core, with an atmosphere on top. The Glacium is the same model, but constructed using real air and snow and ice and rock.

The top half of the Glacium would be filled with air at -20ºC, with a snow machine at the top continuously dropping snow into the air, which would fall to the bottom and form a layer of ice. Above the snow machine there’d be a radiant sun lamp. The bottom half of the Glacium would made out of solid rock or sand or earth, and would have a heater at the bottom.

The entire glacium would be surrounded by a thick layer of insulation, to minimise the effect of the external environment on it.

When the Glacium was working, snow would build up on top of the rock, and act as insulation, causing it to slowly warm up. When the top surface of the rock had risen above 0ºC, the ice above it would start to melt, and melt water would run out of the side of the Glacium. When all the ice above the rock had melted, the rock surface temperature would start to fall, and gradually drop back to near 0ºC. Snow that had been melting when it landed on the warm rock would then start to settle, and ice would start to build up again on the surface of the rock.

In this manner the Glacium would demonstrate a cycle of “ice ages” and meltings. Varying the rate of snowfall, and sunlight from the sun lamp, and rock types, and heat from below, would allow the Glacium to simulate anywhere on Earth.

I reckoned that the Glacium would be about 3 storeys high (maybe more). The top half walls could be made of glass, so people could watch what was happening. In fact, there might be a little sloping auditorium with seats in it, like a cinema. And you could buy day tickets to sit in the auditorium and watch the snow build up, and then melt away. There’d be spacy music playing, following the events in the Glacium. And you could buy ice creams (how apposite) from hot blonde usherettes in ice blue swimsuits. And of course you could smoke.

About Frank Davis

smoker
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

27 Responses to The EU Is About To Destroy The Internet / Glacium

  1. smokingscot says:

    You’ve not thought this through Frank; just imagine how many people have links into your site. I’ve got dozens.

    Now if you were able to get us lot to pay, then that Jaguar you have on your wish list could be bought and paid for.

    Of course this does raise the issue of whether the donor site owner wants to be linked to. Presumably some may chose to opt out, or at least should be given that option. I’d imagine Press tv and Guido, to name just a few, will be only too pleased to be referenced.

    Oh, and what exactly can you do if commentators bung a payable link on your site?

    (Actually this one’s got so much meat on the bone, I’d be here for hours just exacting the willy water).

  2. gimper30 says:

    WOW! I’m stunned–or am I. I had to reread your posting and I still can’t believe it. Orwell is turning over in his grave. The EU move does not even try to be subtle. Freedom of thought is just being sliced and diced. Shame on them if it passes.

  3. blockeddwarf says:

    My Bestie ‘Mr Ecks’ has posted this link to protest to your MEP on Raed’s

    https://saveyourinternet.eu/

  4. Emily says:

    Holy shit. Reading the comments on that article you linked to, I came across this:

    Most people are saying the only solution is moving to Tor, being a Tor host and using the dark web. And/or moving to the United States. The first and second amendments are literally the only thing keeping the world from falling into the end times at this point.

    I really never thought I’d see the day, people from Europe would be talking about wanting to move to the US, but I think they are right.

  5. Rose says:

    Frank, may I suggest you watch

    Carry On Brussels: Inside the EU part2
    http://www.channel4.com/programmes/carry-on-brussels-inside-the-eu

    I think that you will find it particularly revealing.

  6. Frank Davis says:

    http://www.breitbart.com/london/2018/05/31/save-internet-eu-moves-monitor-uploads-censor-memes-tax-links/

    The European Union (EU) is less than a month away from voting to introduce aggressive new online copyright laws and “widespread censorship” measures, which critics say could strangle new media websites and stifle satire and online meme culture.

    Unelected European Commission bureaucrats have drafted legislation which detractors say could force online platforms to monitor and control all uploads to some platforms with “content recognition technologies”. They are also said to have proposed what has been termed a ‘link tax’, which could compel blogs and other websites to pay just to reference content.

    The full effects of the legislation are still unclear, but critics allege that memes, remixes, and other types of user-generated content could be put at risk, as these could technically be seen as breaches of copyright — and so could sharing content on popular websites like Reddit, Tumblr, and Gab.

    Others believe that the laws will hand well-resourced mainstream media firms an advantage over smaller alternative media groups that will struggle to comply with the sweeping new regulations. It is not clear how small news providers and even non-profit groups will be protected from harm.

    The European Parliament is to vote on the copyright proposal late next month, namely Article 13 of the ‘Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on copyright in the Digital Single Market.’

    The ‘link tax’ was proposed in March by German Christian Democrat MEP Axel Voss, who has admitted extra copyright for news sites was “maybe not the best idea”.

    “Whether the ancillary copyright laws will ultimately be the remedy, I do not know. It’s just an attempt to somehow improve this imbalance that prevails at the moment,” he said in an interview in February.

    Julia Reda, a German Pirate Party MEP, has written that “these proposals are pandering to the demands of some news publishers to charge search engines and social networks for sending traffic their way, as well as the music industry’s wish to be propped up in its negotiations with YouTube.

    “These proposals will cause major collateral damage – making many everyday habits on the web and many services you regularly use downright illegal, subject to fees or, at the very least, mired in legal uncertainty.”

  7. waltc says:

    I don’t even get it. If , for instance, you provide a link to an article that’s behind a paywall, as increasingly things are, you simply direct me to a page, controlled by its publisher, that I can either pay for or, if I don’t, not read. If it’s not behind a wall, you and I aresimply giving wider readership to a pn already copyrighted and bylined article.

    However, even tho I don,t get it, it seems to be part of the censorship and thought-control that’s rife throughout both Europe at large and the UK itself. Best you can do –and it should be done to no matter what avail. is write/call your MPs and scream both No to this (can’t they opt out of EU proposals since they’re ostensibly opting out of the EU itself?) and give it as yet another reason to finalize Brexit.

    FYI : the Tommy thing has gotten some irate press over here, at least on Fox, esp. But not only on Tucker Carlson

  8. legiron says:

    Links to sites providing news or commentary.
    ‘Commentary’ is what you get on blogs. Twitter is all ‘commentary’. One well publicised trial and prosecution and the internet will fall silent in the EU. China must be looking on in awe.

    Tessie ‘Jackboots’ May will do nothing at all to stop this. It’s exactly what she’s been having wet dreams about since she was in the Home Office. Even if we subsequently manage to actually leave the EU, she will keep this part for sure.

  9. jaxthefirst says:

    Not sure I understand the full technicalities of this, but presumably the fee would be automatically charged whenever a link was clicked on. So wouldn’t one way round it be for people wanting to provide links to provide them in an unclickable form, i.e. just typed out as script (a bit like people on Friends Reunited – remember that? – which disallowed people from putting their own e-mail addresses in as links, would get round it by giving their e-mail address as “xxx @ xxx.com”), which people could then just re-type to get to the site/page? Not quite so convenient, true, but if it kept the Internet truly “open” then surely worth it?

    • Frank Davis says:

      I had a similar idea, which was to link to another site that linked to the relevant site. So if I wanted to link to Le Monde, I wouldn’t put in lemonde.fr or whatever it is, but I’d instead link to edwardsmithjones.com/lemondelinkspage/. You’d get to Le Monde in two clicks rather than one.

      I can imagine that “offshore” websites would start to appear that were full of links to EU taxed news and commentary websites. The EU would try to get tax off these websites, but if they were in Russia or China they’d have difficulty doing so.

      But aren’t search engines really just websites that are full of links to other websites? Aren’t the existing search engines – Google, Bing, etc – likely to be hit hardest by this tax? They must provide thousands of links to Le Monde every day, and so must become liable for one heck of a lot of tax. Death of the search engines?

      • RdM says:

        But then wouldn’t “edwardsmithjones.com” be getting the tax, sanction, whatever?
        I admit I’m not clear on the technicalities of this proposal either…

        sci-hub still seems to be surviving, cleverly, though.

  10. Pingback: Writing and the Death of Speech | underdogs bite upwards

  11. Tony says:

    Before the Internet gets destroyed I thought I’d post this on twitter.

  12. OK, let’s take this thought and run with it. The EU taxes everything that links to content inside the EU. Google decides it doesn’t like this, and lowers the page ranking of every page that tries to charge them. Overnight, most of the EU vanishes into the nether regions of the major search engines, and every retailer that relied upon this traffic finds that the traffic, the page hits, and the money has vanished.

    In a week or so, the EU high command will have made its self quite spectacularly unpopular with pretty much every single member state, and most of the internet will have worked out how to route around the morons. Inside a fortnight, we’re back to business as usual with the morons not getting any money but plenty of hate instead.

    This is a proposal that will kill parts of the EU, plain and simple.

  13. junican says:

    I am not sure (is anyone?) but I think that it is the platforms which will pay the link tax whenever anyone at all links to a copyrighted site. That means that the platforms will have to decide whether to allow such links to be made.
    There are all sorts of questions. For example, will all sites be presumed to be copyrighted, or will they have to state that they are copyrighted? That is a huge question because most people who write stuff on the net WANT people to read their content. Would a person upload a video which they do not want people to look at?
    Chaos.

  14. Pingback: The Enigma of Article 13 | Frank Davis

No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.