FTFY.
Laws are only worth the paper they’re written on and the willingness of the executive to actually execute them. Here in the US, the latter is now missing, and the former isn’t for sale (yet, give them time to put it on the Russian black market)
Also, it’s evident that no, you aren’t really protected by it. That’s why a lot of countries forbid sending personal information into the US. You have secret courts on the Executive branch that can force you to disclose anything to them and keep that fact secret.
Whoever wants to compel you for information will add financial/mental/physical pressure until you no longer wish to remain silent. That’s true in democratic governments, stories/history tells us it’s worse in autocratic ones.
You have the right to remain silent… the question is whether you can with external pressure.
Correct, it’s a concern everywhere. I’ll still lean towards stable countries as a host as the risk is lower.
It’s a Lemmy instance, not the secret to world peace. Very few individuals on this planet would undergo any applied compliance pressure from a government agency just for others to continue using a self-hosted social media instance. Appealing in court and following the legal process? Sure, if you can get the time off work and can take the financial hit. Facing threats of raids, arrests, deportation, etc? That’s magnitudes tougher.
It wouldn’t be reasonable for us to expect John from down the road to prioritise keeping their Lemmy instance up over whatever is happening locally at the time that impacts them. It’s easier for everyone, including potential hosts in unstable countries, to sign up to instances where the risk is lower.
You can’t be compelled to give information. We have the fifth amendment.
FTFY. Laws are only worth the paper they’re written on and the willingness of the executive to actually execute them. Here in the US, the latter is now missing, and the former isn’t for sale (yet, give them time to put it on the Russian black market)
That explicitly do not apply to companies.
Also, it’s evident that no, you aren’t really protected by it. That’s why a lot of countries forbid sending personal information into the US. You have secret courts on the Executive branch that can force you to disclose anything to them and keep that fact secret.
Whoever wants to compel you for information will add financial/mental/physical pressure until you no longer wish to remain silent. That’s true in democratic governments, stories/history tells us it’s worse in autocratic ones.
You have the right to remain silent… the question is whether you can with external pressure.
https://xkcd.com/538/
A classic.
Well, that’s a problem in every country then, that’s not specific to America.
Correct, it’s a concern everywhere. I’ll still lean towards stable countries as a host as the risk is lower.
It’s a Lemmy instance, not the secret to world peace. Very few individuals on this planet would undergo any applied compliance pressure from a government agency just for others to continue using a self-hosted social media instance. Appealing in court and following the legal process? Sure, if you can get the time off work and can take the financial hit. Facing threats of raids, arrests, deportation, etc? That’s magnitudes tougher.
It wouldn’t be reasonable for us to expect John from down the road to prioritise keeping their Lemmy instance up over whatever is happening locally at the time that impacts them. It’s easier for everyone, including potential hosts in unstable countries, to sign up to instances where the risk is lower.