Interested in the intersections between policy, law and technology. Programmer, lawyer, civil servant, orthodox Marxist. Blind.


Interesado en la intersección entre la política, el derecho y la tecnología. Programador, abogado, funcionario, marxista ortodoxo. Ciego.

  • 0 Posts
  • 28 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 5th, 2023

help-circle



  • Very well-reasoned article, though the political constraints might end up making implementing its recommendations impossible. Hard to see how the US and EU could make the rhetorical shifts it would take. If events continue as they are now, the military realities may preclude it. While it seems advantageous to reach a negotiated settlement for all sides at the moment, this will not remain the case forever.











  • Not that I expect a lot of consistency from imperialists, but essentially the same lines of argument can be used regarding the Russian Federation.

    An advisory opinion would effectively settle Israel’s “bilateral dispute” without the state’s consent.

    Ditto for .ru and .ua.

    The court is not equipped to examine a “broad range of complex factual issues concerning the entire history of the parties’ dispute”.

    Same thing, especially if we get back to the formation of the Soviet Union, independence referenda, and so on.

    An advisory opinion would conflict with existing agreements between the parties and negotiation frameworks endorsed by the UN.

    This would be Minsk I and II.

    The request is not appropriate as it asks the court to “assume unlawful conduct on the part of Israel”.

    Ditto.


  • The biggest issues for me are:

    1. No centralisation means there’s no canonical single source of truth.
    2. Account migration.
    3. Implementation compatibility.

    No single source of truth leads to the weird effect that if you check a post on your instance, it will have different replies from those on a different instance. Only the original instance where it got posted will have a complete reply set–and only if there are no suspensions involved. Some of this is fixable in principle, but there are technical obstacles.

    Account migration is possible, but migration of posts and follows is non-trivial, Also migration between different implementations is usually not possible. Would be nice if people could keep a distinction between their instance, and their identity, so that the identity could refer to their own domain, for example.

    Last, the issue with implementation compatibility. Ideally it should be possible to use the same account to access different services, and to some extent it works (mastodon can post replies to lemmy or upvote, but not downvote, for example).


  • Historically many if not most conflicts started with the breach of an agreement. Without getting bogged down in irrelevant detail, there are issue of self-determination of Crimea, which repeatedly in 3 referenda (2 if you wish to exclude the last one) pronounced in favour of either autonomy or being part of the CIS (effectively Russian Federation). Likewise, and setting aside the 2014 events for the moment, there also were agreements that, in principle, may have served as a valid status quo, such as Minsk II, and were not complied to by the parties.

    So, sure, some form of trust-building will be necessary. But what’s the alternative? Endless war?