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

EU to greenlight Chat Control tomorrow

patrick-breyer.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 360 posts

Re: EU to greenlight Chat Control tomorrow

#71

Post by squigz »

Wytwwww wrote: post #48
FredPret wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We learnt the value of free speech the hard way, and very slowly. Now we need to keep extending such notions to the rapidly increasing frontiers that new tech is exposing. Hopefully with more tech-savvy generations gradually taking power, this will happen without too many painful lessons.

> We learnt the value of free speech the hard way, and very slowly Did we though? Unfortunately outside the US and a handful of other places free speech doesn't seem to be valued that much, often it's even viewed as a threat (and I'm not talking about authoritarian regimes). It's a double-edged sword to be fair, enabling misinformation and chaos.

> Unfortunately outside the US and a handful of other places free speech doesn't seem to be valued that much, often it's even viewed as a threat

Can you convince me of this? Because it's not my impression.

Re: EU to greenlight Chat Control tomorrow

#72

Post by consumer451 »

dauertewigkeit wrote: post #67
consumer451 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anti-hate speech got you? What were you trying to say exactly? One can go on X right now and spew any hate speech that one wants. How about just political opinions? How quickly we forgot "free speech zones." This is the government actually limiting public speech in the USA. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_speech_zone BTW, I am not for this regulation in any way. I just don't see the connection to hate speech.

Hate speech accusations are a bit like being accused of rape. Once it happens you automatically get tainted and it is very hard to defend yourself in the public sphere, even if the accusations are totally unfounded. This is of course abused by evil people. Moreover, what counts as hate speech can very suddenly alter depending on whoever is in charge, and even if the public don't go along with it, it can still be used…

I am not directing this at you, or anyone here, truly. However, this XKCD always come to mind whenever I hear the topics of hate speech and free speech mentioned within proximity of each other:

https://xkcd.com/1357/

Re: EU to greenlight Chat Control tomorrow

#73

Post by Dig1t »

worldsayshi wrote: post #68

How is VPN supposed to work? How are internet banks supposed to operate? All security will go out the window? Backdoors everywhere? Will TLS have to be redone with a third snooping party in the mix? Is that what we're going for here?

Client side scanning is going to be required, it doesn’t matter if you’re on a VPN if your device is self-reporting.

Re: EU to greenlight Chat Control tomorrow

#74

Post by squigz »

seydor wrote: post #43
FredPret wrote: post #4

This is why the roles of the major players in society (government, monopolies) need to be circumscribed. Large organizations will always try to grow in size and power. We need some sort of human right for digital privacy to make this sort of thing illegal.

> We need some sort of human right for digital privacy to make this sort of thing illegal. That's how you get another level of super-government, i.e. one more tyrant in the chain Historically the circle breaks only with revolution and violence . Maybe checks and balances would work as a system, but the EU has neither

> Historically the circle breaks only with revolution and violence .

This sort of rhetoric is dangerous.

> Maybe checks and balances would work as a system

It does seem to be working well in America.

Re: EU to greenlight Chat Control tomorrow

#75

Post by squigz »

ziggy_star wrote: post #30
FredPret wrote: post #4

This is why the roles of the major players in society (government, monopolies) need to be circumscribed. Large organizations will always try to grow in size and power. We need some sort of human right for digital privacy to make this sort of thing illegal.

[dead]

It's remarkable to you that calls for violence get flagged?

Re: EU to greenlight Chat Control tomorrow

#76

Post by godelski »

cjbgkagh wrote: post #22
FredPret wrote: post #4

This is why the roles of the major players in society (government, monopolies) need to be circumscribed. Large organizations will always try to grow in size and power. We need some sort of human right for digital privacy to make this sort of thing illegal.

Free speech absolutists like myself got run over culturally with hate speech laws so for anyone continuing on the fight I wish you the best of luck.

Because frankly free speech absolutists got hijacked by people who have no intention of creating free speech (such as Musk). And frankly, many of the arguments are not meaningful to normal people or to those opposing it. You have to talk to your audience. And in this case it is recognizing that most of laws controlling speech has not been aimed at those universally hated like Nazis, but rather those who have little power, like minorities. People think there is a free lunch here, but it just doesn't exist.

So the free speech absolutist groups got infiltrated by those that wanted to dog whistle and (almost) never tailored arguments to those who were strongly opposed; and worse, those who need free speech the most.

The same often goes for encryption. And we have to deal with adversaries that are willing to straight up lie and promise things that sound nice and sound accurate (things that follow when using basic logic but don't if nuance is incorporated). There are no universal optimas, things with no downsides/costs. But most importantly we have to tailor arguments to audiences, not expect them to be just taken and understood like we do. The priors are different and their objective functions may be different as well. So often people will argue what they think is most important to fall of deaf ears because people don't consider that thing important (at least in context).

Re: EU to greenlight Chat Control tomorrow

#77

Post by dirigableuser »

pantalaimon wrote: post #32
Wytwwww wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably not but you still need to have someone to someone to communicate with even if you manage to install it. If you can't get it on the mainstream app stores it will just be a niche app for "privacy nerds" and drug dealers (in the EU at least..)

All the drug dealers are on Telegram already, they need a hassle free way to communicate with their customers.

Customers as a voluminous body of users can't be underestimated as a solid block of shade for the whistleblowers and journalists

Re: EU to greenlight Chat Control tomorrow

#79

Post by ricardobeat »

Macha wrote: post #34
moffkalast wrote: post #27

> Only Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Austria and Poland are relatively clear that they will not support the proposal, but this is not sufficient for a “blocking minority”. Ahem what? Last I checked any EU country can veto anything on its own. > Belgian EU Council presidency It's Council of the EU, not EU Council, that's the heads of state who don't have any legislative role. But the Council only does inter-co…

> Ahem what? Last I checked any EU country can veto anything on its own. Only on certain topics, which have been narrowed down over time. For most areas (including something like chat control), it comes down to Qualified Majority Voting, which needs at least 55% of countries representing at least 65% of EU population. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_in_the_Council_of_the_E...

55%? That’s a pretty low bar for laws that will become written in stone for decades.

Re: EU to greenlight Chat Control tomorrow

#80

Post by diego_sandoval »

kelnos wrote: post #63
diego_sandoval wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it would be feasible for Whatsapp, Telegram and Signal to form a coalition that pledges to withdraw from any country or market that tries to pull these shenanigans, such that the sum of them is big enough to play that game. The hardest to convince would be Whatsapp, but I think that Zuckerberg is one of the few big tech CEOs that still has principles, at least sometimes. I think it could happen.

> I think that Zuckerberg is one of the few big tech CEOs that still has principles "Still"? I'm not aware of a time when he's publicly shown any sort of principles.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-36187028

Google or Microsoft would just give up data of their users at the first request to avoid a ban.

Sure, Meta can't * do it because of E2E, but that alone is much better than what Google does.

* without pushing a malicious update.

Post reply on HN