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

181–190 of 360 posts

Re: EU to greenlight Chat Control tomorrow

#181

Post by pas »

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?

VPN continues to work, see top of page 39

https://cdn.netzpolitik.org/wp-upload/2024/05/2024-05-28_Cou...

for more details on this thing see page 45 and 46

in general this is a framework to

- have big players to spend money, have a team that for this, and have effective "parental controls" (have more age-appropriatedness controls, more tagging options for users/content, etc)

- have an EU center that works on the technological part of the problem

Re: EU to greenlight Chat Control tomorrow

#182

Post by nikolay »

I think the government is more reasonable than the private corporations. As an example, I got suspended by Facebook yesterday with nobody to contact. All my friends from school, relatives, and former coworkers are gone - with most of them I was connected only via Facebook. All my messages in Facebook Messenger groups have been deleted! Everything that I ever posted, shared, or reacted to - gone! With no recourse - all at the mercy of some 20-year-old reviewer. Yeah, the government sucks, but private corporations suck much more! At least I can complain to the government and talk to real people!

I know there are alternatives to Facebook - I've pitched all of them to my friends, but people my age are still only on Facebook.

Re: EU to greenlight Chat Control tomorrow

#183

Post by magicalhippo »

marcinzm wrote: post #158
anigbrowl wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EU was established to provide mutual economic and military security in Europe on a federal model following WW2, and it's done very well in that aim. Of course it's not perfect, but shallow takes like the one above provide nothing of value.

> military security Wasn't that NATO (aka mostly the US)?

There's also the point that countries with close economic ties have more to lose by going to war with each other.

Re: EU to greenlight Chat Control tomorrow

#184

Post by tonynator »

erklik wrote: post #159
wwtrv wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amongst other examples: https://globalfreedomofexpression.columbia.edu/cases/e-s-v-a... . Not that I'm a particularly huge fan of some of the opinions that some of these people tend to express (to be fair in this case it's something that Muslims/their holy books acknowledge as well so it shouldn't be controversial at all...) but the whole idea of "balancing the rights to freedom of religion and expression" just seems…

The issue is when "free speech absolutists" often aren't actually that. They'll stand up to defend folks like the ones from the case you cited because "Free Speech". Yet, they'll also defend laws like the ones passed earlier in the year by the US House about codifying the IHRA's definition of anti-Semitism. > spectrum The spectrum is far too often simply colored by the politics one's interested in, i.e. Free Speech i…

>they'll also defend laws like the ones passed earlier in the year by the US House about codifying the IHRA's definition of anti-Semitism.

Anyone who defended that isn't even close to a free-speech absolutist.

>I don't believe anyone truly has a Free Speech Absolutist position

I do. It's what makes America great. Erosions like that jewish law are slowly weakening that.

You should be allowed to say whatever you want about White people, straight people, men, Christians, etc. and I should be able to say whatever I want about jews.

You just don't want to acknowledge such a stance is possible because the people you agree with are in power, allow the speech you agree with, and censor the speech you don't disagree with, so you stand with nothing to gain by supporting free speech. That's a personal choice to have no integrity.

Re: EU to greenlight Chat Control tomorrow

#185

Post by sureIy »

ls612 wrote: post #179
pavon wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple is easy - they had already implemented this voluntarily until they got pushback, and decided against rolling it out.

They decisively said “this was a bad idea” and disavowed the effort.

Things change, especially when the Gov says they must. It’s already been a few years. Given the “Apple in China” precedent I wouldn’t be so optimistic.

Re: EU to greenlight Chat Control tomorrow

#186

Post by nicce »

pas wrote: post #177
dankai wrote: post #167

The current draft would cover every kind of service that allows people to exchange information so that every DM you send on reddit, twitter, discord, steam, ... would be have to be scanned. Not even the most totalitarian governments on this planet have tried to implement something like this. Also it sounds extremely illusory that the people exchanging CSAM wouldn't simply switch to private services knowing their mess…

page 46. "... measures shall be ... targeted and proportionate in relation to that risk, taking into account, in particular, the seriousness of the risk as well as the provider’s financial and technological capabilities and the number of users; ..." . . It's a big framework to push the industry to have more "parental controls". Everything is covered, but there the actual requirements make sense. See page 45. It's sti…

Writing documents like these with Word is a sin.

Re: EU to greenlight Chat Control tomorrow

#187

Post by pas »

gpvos wrote: post #84
Dig1t wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

How would my device be (self-)reporting?

Based on this proposal the strategy is

  - providers spend money on having a counter-abuse team
  - providers and authorities cooperate to identify risks
  - providers implement proportional controls based on the risks
so if Meta/Signal/etc comes up with something they implement it

users can continue to run their own private stuff.

it seems this has almost nothing do with the organized sex crime stuff, it's about catching those lone pervs who realized they can send dick picks to minors all day.

see page 45 and 46 https://cdn.netzpolitik.org/wp-upload/2024/05/2024-05-28_Cou...

"... measures shall be ... targeted and proportionate in relation to that risk, taking into account, in particular, the seriousness of the risk as well as the provider’s financial and technological capabilities and the number of users; ..."

Re: EU to greenlight Chat Control tomorrow

#188

Post by tonynator »

StrLght wrote: post #122
llm_trw wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because 15 years ago this was the default point of view everywhere online. Then the unwashed masses came and banned us.

Well, calling people "unwashed masses" because they don't agree with you isn't the greatest way to start the discussion, I guess.

It doesn't matter, insulting people is fine. Censoring them is not.

Re: EU to greenlight Chat Control tomorrow

#189

Post by tonynator »

Spivak wrote: post #99
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.

Free Speech Absolutism was/is connected with hate speech because sites that hold up such an ideal end up being the landing pad for the very worst people who were banned everywhere else. There aren't enough normal people who vote with their money/time/engagement to reach critical mass on those platforms. And turns out very few people want actually free speech. We're in a forum with strong moderation and the discussion…

When your ideas are so bad that you need to censor any discussion of opposing ideas lest they immediately win, it's time to change your ideas.

Re: EU to greenlight Chat Control tomorrow

#190

Post by tonynator »

squigz wrote: post #149
ziggy_star wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

To be fair, I'm the only who we know for certain interpreted your comment in the way I did, and I vouched/unflagged it. Who knows why anyone else would flag it?

Because they disagree with it and want it hidden. That is the entire point of the flagging system, to hide opinions the flaggers disagree with from those too oblivious to turn on showdead.
Post reply on HN