Live data from Hacker News

Messaging and chat control

patrick-breyer.de

61–70 of 336 posts

Re: Messaging and chat control

#61
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True. Although nothing-to-hiders will chime in quickly, stating that their shopping history isn't really that important to their sense of privacy.

They wouldn't like their neighbors knowing their shopping history, the principle should be the same.

But their neighors do not know it, and if amazon or the government knows it(pr their browser histpry, emails, ...) it has the same effect to them, that god knows it all. Can't do anything about it. Too distant to care. Thats my conclusion of privacy discussions with "normal" people.

Re: Messaging and chat control

#62
post #46

The news are pretty depressing these last couple of days. We're marching towards very dystopian future.

We have had unprecedented growth and development in the world, it's just that bad news sells more papers. Don't let it bring you down!

> unprecedented growth

.. at unprecedented cost

Re: Messaging and chat control

#63
post #6

Privacy is something that people usually only care about on a theoretical level. Practically speaking, they're often happy to not care so much at all if they get something more tangible in return. --- Company: Excuse me, would you mind us profiling you through an accurate survey of most of your everyday purchases? Customer: Heck no! Company: What if we let you collect "points" that will maybe someday safe you a littl…

That's fine. My privacy has a price and I'm happy to sell it when I think it's convenient for me. What's happening here is that a state actor is forcing providers to let the state spy on me. That's an authoritarian policy which I strongly oppose.

How much of a rebate on your taxes would you be happy selling it for?

What about a discount on your purchases, which was funded by the government, who would then buy the data?

Re: Messaging and chat control

#64
post #13

It's agendas like these when you realize submitting your country laws to legislation from Brusel was a fatal error.

I think that the fatal error is not going and vote for the European Parliament elections [0]. You don't get to complain when you decide not to participate in the democratic process.

Even if this was passed by the Council of the EU [1] it would be passed by ministers representing over 55% of the states - and over 65% of the EU population - and could be blocked by 4 countries. Now - we can discuss if a government is a democratic institution, but I guess it's a bit of a stretch to argue otherwise.

In other words: democracy requires information and education, either at the EU or at state level. That's not the issue here.

Your country is not a passive agent in this: your country has a say and you need only four countries to stop this. If you believe that somehow you can influence your government when it's emanating laws locally, but not when - the same government - is voting in the Council, you are just doing some magical thinking.

The EU has one main problem: it's local politicians stoking the fire of "It's the EU doing this, not us" - while at the same time passing legislation in the EU.

[0] https://europarl.europa.eu/election-results-2019/en/turnout/ [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_the_European_Union

Re: Messaging and chat control

#65
post #26
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hold your horses, put down the pitchforks. You realise the author is a _member of the European Parliament_?? And at least in my corner of EU we vote on who to send to EU parliament. You can vote on whoever you want in the national elections and then vote for the pirate party for the EU seat. Edit: from your comment history I guess you vote far right, which is usually the part of EU pushing hardest for these measures?…

It's still no and far from a direct democracy.

> far from a direct democracy.

And?

Direct democracies are far worth than representative democracies in practically everyway. The Covid crisis should have made clear to all that people are not policies experts.

Given than no country in the UE significantly uses direct democracy (referendums are pretty much never used and always devolve into a ridiculous race to who can say the most outrageous thing in front of the media), I don't see how that can be leveraged against the institution.

Re: Messaging and chat control

#66
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Medical apartheid? What’s that referring to?

[flagged]

It's reported in the main government news source, the tagesschau, in Germany all the time and (at least for Germany) its also blown waaaayy out of proportion. For example, in my home-town of 170,000 the demo was 30 people…

The "police brutality" used against the QAnon, Nazis, and the so called "Querdenker" demonstrators here in Germany is laughable, when you compare what the police does against left-leaning demonstrations here in Germany on a regular basis.

So please stop spreading this FUD.

Re: Messaging and chat control

#67
post #15

This report [0] is all I could find. I would have expected this to be more widely reported, and I'm surprised to see it isn't. [0]: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2021-0319...

That link shows the existing legislation, approved in July. Today it doesn't mandate anybody to scan anything but effectively _allows_ service providers to scan for CSAM, if they wish, by defining "combating online child sexual abuse" as a legitimate reason to process personal data within the limitations of the EU's various privacy & data protection directives (GDPR being the obvious one, but there's others too).

It's worth noting that this was legal everywhere else in the world already (Google are free to scan a US user's Gmail for CSAM with no problem, if they want to).

The motivating concern was that service providers who do already scan for this kind of abuse material (everywhere in the world) were at risk of having to disable such scanning entirely for EU citizens due to privacy laws. This is 'temporary', in that it's a quick fix to avoid service providers immediately disabling all those systems, until more concrete rules on how/when/if service providers should scan content for CSAM are put in place.

That part is not a big problem (imo). The risk is that future legislation goes much further.

The article here seems to be largely lobbying and pushing general awareness of the issue, rather than reporting on any real news (not that that's necessarily bad). So far, there's no concrete proposal AFAICT, let alone a planned vote on such legislation. The EU Commission (who propose legislation, which is then voted on by the parliament etc) have previously said they're looking into mandatory scanning, but given the pushback it's unclear whether that's still the plan.

In the end, it's probably not widely reported because the mandatory part doesn't appear to have a concrete proposal in motion yet. Articles like this are appearing anyway because it _might_ be proposed legislation soon (there's mentions of Autumn 2021) and it's important to mobilize to inform the public and make their opinions visible as early as possible, rather than waiting until the last minute.

Re: Messaging and chat control

#68
post #13

It's agendas like these when you realize submitting your country laws to legislation from Brusel was a fatal error.

I agree.

Individual countries are equally corrupted by big businesses and authoritarian leaning, but you can generally count on inefficient flip flopping right-left parties to not do too much damage in any direction.

The EU seems to be way more efficient in getting us straight to 1984 or Soviet Russia V2.

Re: Messaging and chat control

#69

I think this isn't getting nearly enough traction, especially considering how undemocratic EU's legislative procedures can get. Considering the lack of direct democracy in the European Union, exposure and public protest is the only viable way to oppose this legislature. There's also an ongoing petition against the legislature: https://www.openpetition.eu/petition/online/preserve-eprivac...

I wish people understood the origins and structure of the EU. It grew out of a trade association (ECSC) and has very little to do with direct or even representative democracy in the standard sense of the word, i.e. representative of the populace. It is an external political class with only tangential connections to individual citizens.

This is an issue, because it gives opponents of European integration a fairly legitimate position to be critical.

Re: Messaging and chat control

#70
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Medical apartheid? What’s that referring to?

[flagged]

Another question : Ruptly is reporting live on these protests in Paris and Berlin on YT weekly now.

Are they part of the censorship? Is there something they are not showing?

Post reply on HN