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

Fight Chat Control

fightchatcontrol.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 528 posts

Re: Fight Chat Control

#51

Post by lucideer »

Disposal8433 wrote: post #9

I'm French and every idiot supports it, even the so-called left. There is nothing I can do except donate money every month to GrapheneOS ( https://grapheneos.org/donate ). Democracy is dead for me.

Unfortunately this seems to be a bug in the website.

For any representatives that have no position / position unknown, rather than the website showing them as "Unknown" as you'd expect, it just assumes their position is the position of their government's EU Council representative supports this.

Many national representatives are aligned with opposition parties within their own country, and as such it's highly likely their position will deviate from that of their government, so this is a pretty bad misrepresentation. Highly misleading.

Re: Fight Chat Control

#52

Post by Telemakhos »

pessimizer wrote: post #37
zubspace wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a shitty system, if one side just needs to succeed one time while the other side needs to succeed over and over again. What really should be done is to disallow proposals, which are kinda the same. Once a mass surveillance proposal like this is defeated, it shouldn't be allowed to be constantly rebranded and reintroduced. We need a firewall in our legislative process that automatically rejects any future attempt…

> What really should be done is to disallow proposals, which are kinda the same. This very much exists in a lot of parliamentary rules authorities, but it's usually limited to once per "session." They just need to make rules that span sessions that raise the bar for introducing substantially similar legislation. It can easily be argued that passing something that failed to pass before, multiple times, should require…

Is there no way to codify a negative right, like “The right of the European people to privacy in their communications and security in their records through encryption shall not be infringed?” Negative rights reserved to the people should be more important than positive laws granting power to the government.

Re: Fight Chat Control

#54

Post by idiotsecant »

isoprophlex wrote: post #2

God fucking damn it not again This is, what, the fifth time in ten years they try to pass shit like this?

The fascist, autocratic impulse is a big in the human firmware and will never go away. We exist constantly balanced on the razor edge precipice because we are capable of little else. Self-governing humans are not a stable system.

Re: Fight Chat Control

#55

Post by amarcheschi »

lordnacho wrote: post #47
101008 wrote: post #38

I was very pissed at this, and when I read this part I couldn't continue, it boiled my blood. > *EU politicians exempt themselves from this surveillance under "professional secrecy" rules. They get privacy. You and your family do not. Demand fairness.

Can't make this shit up. The Danish government (currently holding the rotating chair) also raised the pension age for everyone. Other than themselves. But also, how does this get implemented? What's stopping me from using, say, Signal, which being OSS would likely have a single line I could comment out and compile for myself? How would I get busted for that? Or I could get clever and have AI generate some random chat…

It doesn't say how AFAIK, although it's been a few months from when I read the original proposal. If I'm not wrong it would delegate that to service providers - the organizations managing the apps, telegram, meta, whatever the name of the foundation for the signal app is ecc

Re: Fight Chat Control

#56

Post by dachris »

Centigonal wrote: post #25

In the US, we have government programs like PRISM and unchecked oligopolies that surveil us and use that information to identify dissent, sell us ads, and alter our behavior. In the EU, there are these initiatives to surveil us in the name of safety. Is there any regime out there who's not trying to mass-surveil their citizens for one reason or another?

Power wants to stay in power.

In a healthy society, citizens should always be wary of those in power and keep them on their toes, because power corrupts (and attracts already problematic characters).

Not driveling when they get thrown some crumbs or empty phrases ("child safety", "terrorism").

Re: Fight Chat Control

#57

Post by shark1 »

lordnacho wrote: post #47
101008 wrote: post #38

I was very pissed at this, and when I read this part I couldn't continue, it boiled my blood. > *EU politicians exempt themselves from this surveillance under "professional secrecy" rules. They get privacy. You and your family do not. Demand fairness.

Can't make this shit up. The Danish government (currently holding the rotating chair) also raised the pension age for everyone. Other than themselves. But also, how does this get implemented? What's stopping me from using, say, Signal, which being OSS would likely have a single line I could comment out and compile for myself? How would I get busted for that? Or I could get clever and have AI generate some random chat…

It's like any other crime. They cannot stop you from stealing, for example. By doing it, you will not be a lawful citizen.

Re: Fight Chat Control

#58

Post by whatevaa »

lordnacho wrote: post #47
101008 wrote: post #38

I was very pissed at this, and when I read this part I couldn't continue, it boiled my blood. > *EU politicians exempt themselves from this surveillance under "professional secrecy" rules. They get privacy. You and your family do not. Demand fairness.

Can't make this shit up. The Danish government (currently holding the rotating chair) also raised the pension age for everyone. Other than themselves. But also, how does this get implemented? What's stopping me from using, say, Signal, which being OSS would likely have a single line I could comment out and compile for myself? How would I get busted for that? Or I could get clever and have AI generate some random chat…

You would get labeled a "potential criminal". See some comment from police labelling Graphene OS users as criminals.

Steganography exists and is undefeatable, though very low bandwith.

Re: Fight Chat Control

#59

Post by RickS »

cobbzilla wrote: post #8

Is Europe sliding into feudalism? The impression is that the government/megacorp complex are the lords, everyone else should accept their place as a serf and do whatever they’re told.

This video by Benn Jordan makes the case that yes, traditional capitalism and empowerment by way of ownership are eroding in favor of a rent-seeking subscription economy. This economy requires continuous payment for participation with services that are not only merely loaned to us, but are loaned under the constant threat of banishment if we fail to contort ourselves to comply with nebulous, ever changing terms set by orgs that don't care about us. One such contortion is the agreement to be surveilled at all times.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqtrNXdlraM

Re: Fight Chat Control

#60

Post by lucideer »

A little context here since this website is highly misleading:

- EU Council holds more power in Europe than EU Parliament

- EU Council is pushing this regulation

- this website misrepresents the positions of most members of EU Parliament - it shows "Supports" despite most of them being "Unknown"

Overall, while people should be encouraged to contact their MEPs, I suspect many are already very informed on this & strongly opposed. Whether Parliament will end up having enough power to stop it is a different question.

Post reply on HN