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

EU to legislate about Chat Control behind closed doors

patrick-breyer.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 463 posts

Re: EU to legislate about Chat Control behind closed doors

#61

Post by mcv »

ajsnigrutin wrote: post #45
elric wrote: post #8

This is going to further increase anti-EU sentiment. This is unacceptable behaviour, but no politician is ever going to experience any negative consequences over this because they're so very far removed from the democratic process.

> This is going to further increase anti-EU sentiment. Rightfully so. Except for no-roaming-charges within EU, most people can't name one good regulation that came from EU and couldn't be handled individually by their own country in the last few decades. The latest example is 3eur customs tax per every item bought from china, even if it's a 1eur phone case (1eur + 3eur customs + 22% vat on both.... what's the added v…

There's the lack of customs charges for items from other European countries. The common market is a really big advantage. There's the Euro, and in the past, the EU did a fairly decent job at holding large corporations accountable, although that seems to have disappeared with Neelie Kroes' retirement.

And of course the lack of borders. Being able to go on vacation with no trouble is massive. Do we really want those border checks back?

Re: EU to legislate about Chat Control behind closed doors

#63

Post by kachurovskiy »

Instead of the usual knee-jerk it would be nice to see some level-header analysis on mechanics of these things - who pays for the time of the people that decide to push this particular piece of legislation, how they manage to get into the door, who personally makes the proposal, how they gather support for it.

Re: EU to legislate about Chat Control behind closed doors

#64

Post by 9dev »

m4nu3l wrote: post #50
9dev wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of all things to criticise, you pick out the one ruling that eventually lead to a consolidation of chargers? Really? I haven't ever met a single person who wasn't grateful of being able to have one cable for all their devices.

This is exactly what I'm talking about. A short-term view of the world, progress and technology. All my devices supported USB-C before the EU regulation. But if I wanted to buy a device with a new type of connector, I should have been able to. This is how the USB-C came to be and how any new standard in hardware happens. New technologies are made and just sold, and if they are proven to be superior to others in the m…

> All my devices supported USB-C before the EU regulation.

I don't have this particular problem so it doesn't exist!

It did exist for huge amounts of people. At the time, many manufacturers had proprietary plugs and would still have them if it weren't for this decision.

> The USB-C standard is not the best standard that can exist from now to the end of the universe

Which is why the law can be simply amended as soon as such a standard emerges. If the industry figures out something better than USB-C, pressure will build on the council to do so. This is nothing but a straw man.

Re: EU to legislate about Chat Control behind closed doors

#65

Post by treyd »

sandworm101 wrote: post #62

So are they going to ban encrypted email? I am rather sure i could cobble together a chat UI whose backend was just email protocol. It would be needlessly complex, but all that ISPs would see is yet more encrypted email going back and forth.

Delta Chat does that but it's a bit janky.

Re: EU to legislate about Chat Control behind closed doors

#66

Post by tokai »

iamnothere wrote: post #60
tokai wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean the migrant crisis stirred up things? The anti immigration position in danish politics has been a winning position since the mid 00's.

As the crisis has worsened across Europe, Denmark started unbelievably intrusive AI-enabled mass surveillance of welfare recipients (almost 15% of the population), dangerous infrastructure which could be applied to the population as a whole. And I’d argue that fears over migrant-driven crime are what allowed Denmark’s politicians to push for Chat Control in the first place.

Yeah no I don't buy that, and have never heard that angle before. Surveillance in Denmark is much older than that. Since the personal ID number was rolled out in 1968 its been one long process of integrating public systems with each other to surveil and control. Surveillance of welfare recipients started getting serious in the 00's too. The migrant crisis drove polices like the confiscations of jewelry from foreigners, and public funded commercials in the middle east telling people to stay away.

Internally chat control and migration are never talked about together. Chat control has no leverage on migration in Denmark. Its not a factor that would change anything. It's all about international treaties making it impossible to send people out of the country forcefully. That's the policy the migrant crisis really ignited.

Re: EU to legislate about Chat Control behind closed doors

#67

Post by jvuygbbkuurx »

kubafu wrote: post #55
ajsnigrutin wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is going to further increase anti-EU sentiment. Rightfully so. Except for no-roaming-charges within EU, most people can't name one good regulation that came from EU and couldn't be handled individually by their own country in the last few decades. The latest example is 3eur customs tax per every item bought from china, even if it's a 1eur phone case (1eur + 3eur customs + 22% vat on both.... what's the added v…

Tell me you don't see the value in the tax as a way of discouraging people from ordering a pair of socks from the other side of the globe, while they can buy them locally?

Why let a middleman rentseek?

Re: EU to legislate about Chat Control behind closed doors

#68

Post by m4nu3l »

9dev wrote: post #64
m4nu3l wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly what I'm talking about. A short-term view of the world, progress and technology. All my devices supported USB-C before the EU regulation. But if I wanted to buy a device with a new type of connector, I should have been able to. This is how the USB-C came to be and how any new standard in hardware happens. New technologies are made and just sold, and if they are proven to be superior to others in the m…

> All my devices supported USB-C before the EU regulation. I don't have this particular problem so it doesn't exist! It did exist for huge amounts of people. At the time, many manufacturers had proprietary plugs and would still have them if it weren't for this decision. > The USB-C standard is not the best standard that can exist from now to the end of the universe Which is why the law can be simply amended as soon a…

> I don't have this particular problem, so it doesn't exist!

No, what I said is that you could find devices with USB-C in all the categories that are now regulated. This means it was pretty easy to find devices like that if you really valued USB-C. Of course, if you wanted an iPhone but you liked USB-C, you would have had a problem. A problem that is much less worse than blocking progress.

> Which is why the law can be simply amended as soon as such a standard emerges. If the industry figures out something better than USB-C, pressure will build on the council to do so. This is nothing but a straw man.

You totally ignored what I wrote, or you didn't understand it. No standard can emerge if you can't test it on the market. You can have a bureaucrat choose the next one from some proposal. It's not the same.

Re: EU to legislate about Chat Control behind closed doors

#69

Post by giuscri »

sandworm101 wrote: post #62

So are they going to ban encrypted email? I am rather sure i could cobble together a chat UI whose backend was just email protocol. It would be needlessly complex, but all that ISPs would see is yet more encrypted email going back and forth.

The recent times showed us that technical solutions are bananas.

Guardrails must be put at the constitution level, or any tech bypass can be just declared illegal.

Post reply on HN