Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Majority of EU countries support scanning of audio communications

euractiv.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 55 posts

Re: Majority of EU countries support scanning of audio communications

#31

Post by denton-scratch »

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #10

This is a terrible headline. It gives impression that the majority of electorate supports this. Or maybe majority of their respective parliaments does. But it's just the executive branch of the EU itself- "A majority of the EU Council of Ministers". More or less, each government selects a minister to represent them in this council. The article should really be reporting on how this bill is progressing. I am no legal…

> More or less, each government selects a minister to represent them in this council.

That's right; but note that the minister they select depends on what's being discussed. There isn't really a "Council of Ministers" you could list the names of; it changes for each meeting.

That is, the C of M is really a council of member governments. And what government wouldn't like to have the EU mandate maximum surveillance, so when their citizens complain, they can just blame the EU?

Re: Majority of EU countries support scanning of audio communications

#33

Post by WinstonSmith84 »

anigbrowl wrote: post #11
ilyt wrote: post #3

It's sad that "think of the children" is still argument that works on some dumbasses.

It's equally sad that privacy advocates (of whom I am one) mostly refuse to acknowledge that CSAM is a real and measurable problem, which specifically exploits children's naïveté and lack of agency. 'Think of the children' should absolutely not be the only decision-making criterion, but it should absolutely be among such criteria.

> CSAM is a real and measurable problem

Well, I'd be curious to see how widespread CSAM is altogether, and especially how much WhatsApp, Messengers, and others are relevant for abusers. One thing I know about this topic is that the offenders are mostly close relatives. The thing I don't know, but intuitively, I'd not think that a close relative would take the risk of sending compromising messages on the smartphone of the victim. Not denying it never exists, but what are the numbers we are talking about? As neutral as I'm trying to think, it's very very hard to see a genuine intention into what the EU is doing

Re: Majority of EU countries support scanning of audio communications

#35

Post by BLKNSLVR »

nforgerit wrote: post #14
anigbrowl wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's equally sad that privacy advocates (of whom I am one) mostly refuse to acknowledge that CSAM is a real and measurable problem, which specifically exploits children's naïveté and lack of agency. 'Think of the children' should absolutely not be the only decision-making criterion, but it should absolutely be among such criteria.

You know what would help for real? Social workers, parents empowering on things digital, educative initiatives for all stakeholders and proper case-by-case prosecution by prosecution authorities that are not under-financed and overwhelmed. But hey, this way is easier and gives total government control into hands of possibly bad government actors in the future.

You're absolutely right, and I've said as much in the past. Social work and educational solutions actually have a chance of making things better, actually giving children the tools and knowledge to protect themselves.

Law enforcement is only a tool for punishment of offenders, it in no way "protects children" because the offense has already occurred.

Anecdotal example, but this is seems to be the opposite of wanting to "protect children": https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-05-06/high-risk-paedophile-...

Re: Majority of EU countries support scanning of audio communications

#36

Post by FinnKuhn »

denton-scratch wrote: post #31
ClumsyPilot wrote: post #10

This is a terrible headline. It gives impression that the majority of electorate supports this. Or maybe majority of their respective parliaments does. But it's just the executive branch of the EU itself- "A majority of the EU Council of Ministers". More or less, each government selects a minister to represent them in this council. The article should really be reporting on how this bill is progressing. I am no legal…

> More or less, each government selects a minister to represent them in this council. That's right; but note that the minister they select depends on what's being discussed. There isn't really a "Council of Ministers" you could list the names of; it changes for each meeting. That is, the C of M is really a council of member governments. And what government wouldn't like to have the EU mandate maximum surveillance, so…

You can see this all the time in German politics. Someone says that they don't want to do a thing in Germany and than just do it in the EU. The best example would probably be chat control.

Re: Majority of EU countries support scanning of audio communications

#37

Post by hulitu »

nforgerit wrote: post #27
throw0101c wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I used to be a convinced pro-European but for me it's getting harder and harder to _not_ believe in some kind of plot for assuming total control over their citizens. The EU is just catching up to the US: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A

You mean catching up to government paranoia initiated by 9/11 which led to 2 unnecessary wars, never seen before government surveillance and destabilization of the middle east. Great job, let's do the same!

It was not initiated by 9/11. 9/11 was just an excuse to extend surveillance.

Re: Majority of EU countries support scanning of audio communications

#38

Post by jltsiren »

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #10

This is a terrible headline. It gives impression that the majority of electorate supports this. Or maybe majority of their respective parliaments does. But it's just the executive branch of the EU itself- "A majority of the EU Council of Ministers". More or less, each government selects a minister to represent them in this council. The article should really be reporting on how this bill is progressing. I am no legal…

> I am not sure what happens if it is found unconstitutional in some of the countries concerned.

The general principle is that EU law takes precedence over national laws, including national constitutions. If a member state finds a law unconstitutional, they have a few options. They could try to convince everyone else to change the law. They could change their constitution. They could leave the EU. Or they could just ignore the law and face the political and financial consequences.

In some sense, the EU is no different from any other legally binding international treaty. It's a package deal, so you can't avoid the aspects you don't like. But because treaties are between sovereign states, it's always possible to leave them.

Re: Majority of EU countries support scanning of audio communications

#39

Post by miohtama »

mikece wrote: post #2

Do any of the EU countries have a legal history of having the right to privacy enshrined in law and custom?

Yes. Also in not so delightful way.

https://www.investigate-europe.eu/en/2023/luxembourg-busines...

This is the case that shut down the public access to Companies House registry, as oligarch’s handyman was complaining access to companies ownership data violates the privacy of his businesses. Might be a net loss for the society in this case.

Re: Majority of EU countries support scanning of audio communications

#40

Post by johngladtj »

anigbrowl wrote: post #11
ilyt wrote: post #3

It's sad that "think of the children" is still argument that works on some dumbasses.

It's equally sad that privacy advocates (of whom I am one) mostly refuse to acknowledge that CSAM is a real and measurable problem, which specifically exploits children's naïveté and lack of agency. 'Think of the children' should absolutely not be the only decision-making criterion, but it should absolutely be among such criteria.

There is no problem, there has never been a problem, and there never will be a problem.

It has always without exceptions been a moral panic encouraged and nurtured by established interests to support their urge for more and more control.

Post reply on HN