Live data from Hacker News

The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

netzpolitik.org

271–280 of 443 posts

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#271

> The EU Commission is apparently aware of the problem and is consciously accepting it. So they're fine to read 10% of all messages? Probably more, because of context? Besides this obviously being a massive DDOS on whatever dystopian spy center of sanitary thoughts they want to build, I wonder how the big EU honchos get their free pass on that? Or didn't they simply not consider that they're going to get monitored as…

No. The article explains that it is 90% accuracy on already flagged messages.

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> like Germany, with all due respect to the Germans who still care about their privacy What are you talking about? The german speaking world cares (maybe a bit too much) about privacy. This is why google street view sucks in Germany. NOYB - European Center for Digital Rights is headquartered in Vienna.

Germany has many anti-privacy laws like the Impressum system which forces website owners to essentially dox themselves on a public webpage. I’m not sure where the misconception that Germany had strong privacy laws came from.

I've long believed this, but surprisingly, very few Germans I've spoken to feel this way about it, admittedly my sample is Berlin-centric, so perhaps that isn't a very good litmus test for general German sentiment considering the demographics of Berlin consist of a lot of non-Germans who likely aren't that clued-up, and that perhaps skews sentiment as a whole.

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Greens in Germany are basically a more serious/realistic Pirate party when the topic is related to the internet. Honestly I vote Greens because of that alone. The fact that the rest of their program is sane is a cherry on top.

Oh my god, not at all. The Greens, are more ideologically driven than any other party and not in a good way(and that ideology does not line up with their campaign promises at all). They have been the single most destructive force in German politics and they have not kept a single campaign promise. This is the supposed "Green" party that campaigned on anti-war and not sending weapons to war zones and closing coal that…

> This is the supposed "Green" party that campaigned on anti-war and not sending weapons to war zones and closing coal that has been actively lobbying on reopening coal plants and has been the most vocal in its request to send weapons to Ukraine.

Which is not a new thing; They did the same the last time they had government participation under Red/Green, ended up sending the Bundeswehr to "defend freedom" in Afghanistan.

Thus the running joke about Greens in Germany is how their "green" does not stand for the environment, but rather for the olive green of military uniforms.

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Greens in Germany are basically a more serious/realistic Pirate party when the topic is related to the internet. Honestly I vote Greens because of that alone. The fact that the rest of their program is sane is a cherry on top.

Oh my god, not at all. The Greens, are more ideologically driven than any other party and not in a good way(and that ideology does not line up with their campaign promises at all). They have been the single most destructive force in German politics and they have not kept a single campaign promise. This is the supposed "Green" party that campaigned on anti-war and not sending weapons to war zones and closing coal that…

That's a dangerous way of thinking. Just because you have a common enemey (AfD hating all things Europe and therefor hating this stupid law), does not make you a friend or even a good ally.

Also whataboutism of the highest order! Of course there have been people found to be Nazis in other parties throughout Germany's history. Still no reason whatsoever to even remotely accept them today.

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#276

As an EU citizen I didn't know exactly what that Chat Control thing was, so I web searched it: > The EU wants to oblige providers to search all private chats, messages, and emails automatically for suspicious content – generally and indiscriminately. The stated aim: To prosecute child pornography. [1] Yeah, that will go down well, a central government checking our private conversations for "suspicious content". Of co…

> F. that, the only viable solution I see for my country is an exit from the EU

Genuine, not loaded question: and then what? What do you expect to happen?

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#277
post #7

No comment on the policy etc, but I think the presentation of the numbers is a bit misleading. That 10% is the percent of flagged images which are actually OK. Whether this represents a large fraction of all legal content depends on how much illegal content there is. It would be better if they quoted the false positive rate and false negative rate as a fraction of legal/illegal images respectively. e.g. if 1/100,000,…

This headline seems factually incorrect given what the post actually claims was said. What's described isn't a 10% error rate, but rather 90% precision. It seems like the actual thing which would be called (type I) error rate isn't discussed at all.

I can only imagine that the reddit post was written with that title in bad faith/to promote fearmongering. It seems like this nuance escaped the majority of the commenters on HN as well.

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#278

It doesn't matter how low the error rate is. The fact that the European Commission wants to have a third (robotic) participant listening in on every digital communication is absolutely ridiculous. Saying that this is about child protection is a blatant lie. This serves only as a stepping stone to introduce other screening criteria later. And with opaque ML models it will be very tedious to determine what the model is…

> "Saying that this is about child protection is a blatant lie." Why do you think this? What evidence would convince you that they are sincerely trying to protect children? Helen Lovejoy wasn't lying, she was sincerely (but irrationally) concerned for the children. HNers believe this conspiracy theory about their own governments (that they are deliberately secretly plotting to be despotic, and using the cover of tryi…

> What evidence would convince you that they are sincerely trying to protect children?

If they sent people into the the real world (where the children are), instead of passively spying on bits and bytes

> HNers believe this conspiracy theory about their own governments

Not a conspiracy theory, and not specific to HN. I dare say it's a mainstream opinion, which explains why they can't openly admit to it and the document had to be leaked (similar to Edward Snowden in the US). This comic predates HN: https://i.redd.it/ifb8agngc7dy.jpg

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#279

As an EU citizen I didn't know exactly what that Chat Control thing was, so I web searched it: > The EU wants to oblige providers to search all private chats, messages, and emails automatically for suspicious content – generally and indiscriminately. The stated aim: To prosecute child pornography. [1] Yeah, that will go down well, a central government checking our private conversations for "suspicious content". Of co…

> F. that, the only viable solution I see for my country is an exit from the EU Genuine, not loaded question: and then what? What do you expect to happen?

Probably what Brexiteers expected to happen, that everything they don't like disappears and nothing gets worse.

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Greens in Germany are basically a more serious/realistic Pirate party when the topic is related to the internet. Honestly I vote Greens because of that alone. The fact that the rest of their program is sane is a cherry on top.

Oh my god, not at all. The Greens, are more ideologically driven than any other party and not in a good way(and that ideology does not line up with their campaign promises at all). They have been the single most destructive force in German politics and they have not kept a single campaign promise. This is the supposed "Green" party that campaigned on anti-war and not sending weapons to war zones and closing coal that…

How can you complain about them being "ideologically driven", and simultaneously criticize them for not insisting on anti-war/environmental ideas in the face of war in Ukraine? I say they're doing realpolitik, even if it might lose them some of their more ideologically entrenched voters.
Post reply on HN