• unused_user_name@lemm.ee
    622·
    2 days ago

    I think no government should depend on any commercial platform to communicate with its citizens. As low tech as possible and workable would be best I suppose, so maybe just a website? Mastodon could work too I guess.

  • AItoothbrush@lemmy.zipEnglish
    24·
    2 days ago

    Everything mission critical to the governent should be open source and secure in my opinion. Of course using mastodon would be nice but what is extremely important is to start using linux insead of microsoft and similar examples because they pose a genuine risk.

    • ToxicWaste@lemm.ee
      4·
      23 hours ago

      just talked with a coworker about that. europe is heavily relying on microsoft products and investing a lot of money into them. we are certain, that all that money can easily pay for an expert team to develop and maintain a eu-gov linux distro.

      i know that certain military branches maintain a hardened version of different linux distros for critical systems. why not take this to the next level and have an expert team maintaining your OS?

    • piratekaiser@lemm.eeEnglish
      4·
      2 days ago

      As opposed to Linux, which poses a penguin risk.

      Puns aside, I completely agree with you, but that one might be either the best or the worst thing to happen to OSS. Best case scenario the govt. ensures critical technology is funded and maintained, is invested in and essentially brings a sustainable model for maintainers. Worst case, open source is regulated out of existence as we know it. There was a piece of EU legislation that thankfully didn’t pass, which would’ve resulted in just that. Here’s a reference, sorry I don’t have the time right now for a better one.

  • null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    42·
    2 days ago

    Honestly it just seems nutty to me that every sovereign government isn’t running its own mastodon instance for PR stuff.

    They can continue posting to xitter if they really want.

  • EuropeanMade@feddit.uk
    11·
    2 days ago

    I would love for the “official/non personal” accouts to be on Mastodon. I feel strongly they should do whatever they like in their time off, but for the love of the fediverse please use Mastodon for official communication. A lot of my country’s politicians (the Netherlands) are using Twitter/X to communicate and I hate it. (They even argue on there… I’m not missing that)

  • Joe Bidet@lemmy.ml
    4·
    1 day ago

    A European Citizen Initiative requires a massive investment to come through (quotas of signature per country, amount of signatures, quantity of personal data signatories have to give away, etc.) while at the same time it cannot force the EU to do anything. the Commission can just decide to file it vertically (in the trash can) and they often do.

    So speak about a glorified, expansive petition… and you may find modes of action that are way way more efficient.

    • civilconvo@sopuli.xyz
      5·
      2 days ago

      Tbh, what I’ve understood EU has been trying to help create it for years. It just never got wings to fly. Maybe now there’s enough lift.

  • oakward@feddit.org
    4·
    2 days ago

    I believe each country should host their instance of Mastodon free of censorship (under legal limits, of course). These instances should give accounts to members of political parties. These instances would be federated with as many other instances as possible.

    What would be possible flaws of this system?

  • ciferecaNinjo@fedia.io
    4·
    2 days ago

    “Support” is vague. Your link is unreachable to Tor users so I can’t see what it’s about.

    I boycott Twitter wholly. Will not set foot there. In fact, it’s mutual. Twitter kicked me off their platform when I refused to share a mobile phone number. Thus I inherently support dropping TWTR by not consuming it.

    It’s embarassing and very disturbing that the public sector (especially in Europe) uses shitty corporate exclusive walled gardens like Twitter and Facebook. When a politician uses Twitter or Facebook exclusively, they should be sued for free speech infringement. The #1 purpose of free speech is to express yourself to policy makers. When they use an exclusive gatekeeper to block some people from reaching them, it’s an assault on free speech.

    Whether they do Mastodon or not does not matter so much. Would be useful if they did, but the real focus should be on just getting them off exclusive tech. They can work out for themselves that Mastodon is useful and inclusive.

  • Carlo_io@feddit.it
    4·
    2 days ago

    I clicked the link to support the initiative but I landed on the home page. Am I missing something?