171–180 of 528 posts
Can someone explain how they could read my e2e Signal chat messages to my wife about what I'm cooking for dinner? Can someone explain how they could read my e2e Sessions chat message sent via TOR to my wife about what I'm cooking for dinner? Genuinely curious. Can those that are in power break this encryption?
We do need to take action, but be mindful the data as presented isn’t yet entirely accurate. Note the text on the website: > Notice: The positions shown here are based on leaked documents from a July 11th, 2025 meeting of the EU Council's Law Enforcement Working Party (…) The icons next to each name show whether we are displaying their confirmed personal stance or their country's official Council position. This infor…
Regulate the politicians.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A lot of actual pedophiles will be exposed if it was used on politicians, we don't want that.
While we're talking about corrupt politicians, why is this all happening all at once? America, Great Britain, and the EU are all creating tracking, monitoring, and censorship regulations. All at the same time. We're turning the internet into the 1984 inevitability it was predicted to become. We need a Bill of Rights against this. But the public is too lay to push for this. Bolstering or eroding privacy rights will ne…
These guys have been at it for a while.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maximum of at least one year? Is there some kind of award for how nonsensical a law can be?
Member states will implement this into national law. So in the case they will need to implement a maximum of one year or more (but not less). The final law as applied by a judge will just read "punishable by a maximum of [i.e.] fourteen months".
If the max is one year, it can't be more?
WTFF. Fight !! Why is this Thought Policing tolerated? Are we so End Stage Growth Economy that EVERY power broker see now as the time to employer (IC)Enforcement? Gestapo much, anyone?
Because it's what everyone and their mother was calling for during covid to fight the dangerous for opposing authoritarian policies.
Because we have to stop Russia, the republicans, extremists, anti war protests who are actually just , because we have to protect kids, or fight racism...
It was all bullshit and people loved it. Now it's almost too late. If you don't reject it all and fight authoritarianism regardless of party alignment, you're not going to change any of this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Member states will implement this into national law. So in the case they will need to implement a maximum of one year or more (but not less). The final law as applied by a judge will just read "punishable by a maximum of [i.e.] fourteen months".
> maximum of one year or more If the max is one year, it can't be more?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Member states will implement this into national law. So in the case they will need to implement a maximum of one year or more (but not less). The final law as applied by a judge will just read "punishable by a maximum of [i.e.] fourteen months".
> maximum of one year or more If the max is one year, it can't be more?
At least that's how I read it, but it's confusing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not only asinine but also poorly worded. How is this getting approved?
Its properly worded, as it is an EU law declaring atandards for national laws and the implementing national law must specify a penalty range where the maximum is at least one year (but can be more). It seems worded poorly if you think of it as if the phrase was from a criminal law and not a law mandating and setting parameters for criminal laws.
I appreciate all the feedback, and have implemented a few changes. A few points worth accentuating to avoid any misunderstandings. It is correct that the current proposal indeed is at the Council level, introduced as a high-priority item by the Danish Presidency. It is not yet with the Parliament. This is important as both need to be in agreement for any legislation to be adopted into European law. The first two sections of the website thus summarises the level of support at Council level. The source of this data strictly follows leaked documents from a July 11th 2025 meeting of the Council's Law Enforcement Working Party (LEWP) [0], originally reported by [1] and subsequently summarised by [2]. The next meeting for LEWP is scheduled for September 12th [3], shortly after most MEPs return from vacation.
As noted in another comment, the Council level requires at least 15/27 member states to support it. Should this happen, it would then reach the Parliament, pending approval. However, as support at the Council level seems greater than in previous renditions (supported further by Denmark's insistence and confidence on an expedited vote scheduled for October 14 [4]), it seems prudent to target beyond merely the Council-level. This is the intended goal of the third section of the website.
I see a few comments here suggesting that it would be better to label MEPs yet to respond as "Unknown". I initially decided to have MEPs inherit the position of their government, in part because I (a) wanted to encourage MEPs making a statement and clarifying their stance (while some have in the past, circumstances have changed with this version of the legislation); and (b) wanted to encourage a firm opposition at the Parliament level, ideally before the Council vote. However, I recognise how this can be perceived as being misleading. As such, I have updated the appearance such that pending a response, the label reads "Unknown" while the border indicates the presumed stance of the MEP to be that of their government.
I appreciate the interest and feedback: thank you. Ultimately, the goal with this website really is to raise awareness that the proposed legislation, once again, has been resurrected and is making progress. The attention this thread has garnered is greatly appreciated. As all MEPs have been contacted to confirm their stance, I expect responses to arrive in the coming days and weeks, allowing the overview to soon accurately reflect the personal opinions of each MEP.
In the meantime, I would still encourage you to contact your MEPs such that they are aware of your concerns.
[0] https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/council-eu/preparatory-bo...
[1] https://netzpolitik.org/2025/internes-protokoll-eu-juristen-...
[2] https://www.patrick-breyer.de/en/posts/chat-control/
[3] https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/meetings/mpo/2025/9/law-e...
[4] https://www.parlament.gv.at/dokument/XXVIII/EU/26599/imfname...