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

181–190 of 463 posts

Re: EU to legislate about Chat Control behind closed doors

#181

Post by slim »

Cider9986 wrote: post #174
OtomotO wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are living in a strange mixture of 1984, Fahrenheit 451 and Brave New World

>Fahrenheit 451 We are quite far away from that. On the contrary knowledge is preserved better than ever. Anna's Archive estimates they have preserved 16% of the world's books, all available to download with an internet connection. https://annas-archive.gl/faq On the other hand, I can see the side of Fahrenheit 451 where the people don't value books which is what allowed the book burning in the first place.

annas archive is a single point of failure

Re: EU to legislate about Chat Control behind closed doors

#182

Post by pronik »

Cider9986 wrote: post #174
OtomotO wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are living in a strange mixture of 1984, Fahrenheit 451 and Brave New World

>Fahrenheit 451 We are quite far away from that. On the contrary knowledge is preserved better than ever. Anna's Archive estimates they have preserved 16% of the world's books, all available to download with an internet connection. https://annas-archive.gl/faq On the other hand, I can see the side of Fahrenheit 451 where the people don't value books which is what allowed the book burning in the first place.

If you need to point to Anna's Archive for knowledge preservation, then we as a society are not intentionally preserving knowledge, quite the opposite actually.

Re: EU to legislate about Chat Control behind closed doors

#183

Post by navane »

Cider9986 wrote: post #174
OtomotO wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are living in a strange mixture of 1984, Fahrenheit 451 and Brave New World

>Fahrenheit 451 We are quite far away from that. On the contrary knowledge is preserved better than ever. Anna's Archive estimates they have preserved 16% of the world's books, all available to download with an internet connection. https://annas-archive.gl/faq On the other hand, I can see the side of Fahrenheit 451 where the people don't value books which is what allowed the book burning in the first place.

Like you said in the second part: people don't want to know anymore and just want to watch "game shows". No one is forbidding anything like in the other books. Doom scrolling is peak Fahrenheit.

Re: EU to legislate about Chat Control behind closed doors

#184

Post by navane »

thegrimmest wrote: post #178
Havoc wrote: post #58

The global push to kill privacy makes me sad. Feels like I grew up in a golden age and subsequent generations won't care because they never knew a different world

Maybe a hot take, but I don't know that "privacy" and "anonymity" are the same thing, or that the latter is worth preserving. I would very much like to live in a world where everyone stood by everything they said online with their real identity, just as they already do in the real world. This was already the case for all of human history until the information age. If you wanted to say something, you had to physically…

Do you ever wonder why we vote anonymously?

Re: EU to legislate about Chat Control behind closed doors

#185

Post by intended »

theshrike79 wrote: post #135
Havoc wrote: post #58

The global push to kill privacy makes me sad. Feels like I grew up in a golden age and subsequent generations won't care because they never knew a different world

I grew up when everyone was saying "don't post your face, name or address on the internet" - and that's what I've done. There are a total of maybe 3-6 pictures of me on the internet and my real name isn't attached to most of my brainfarts online. It's not that I hide it like a secret agent, I just don't shove my face and name next to every opinion I have. But the younger generations... They grew up with Snapchat whic…

I still remember conversations here on HN, around the time Facebook was launched. It was considered insanity that you would give up your privacy to a firm.

I remember how that what seemed absurdly risky, meant absolutely nothing to the average person, and the astronomic value Facebook began to accumulate.

I wonder if it wasn't social media that set up the death spiral of the internet. The walled gardens on content and then the ad revenue created incentives to increase engagement, while capturing the value which would have gone to the open internet.

In that light, it seems AI firms are going to complete what Social Media started. Sequestering the remaining value of information and content, and then earning rents on it.

Re: EU to legislate about Chat Control behind closed doors

#186

Post by budududuroiu »

thegrimmest wrote: post #178
Havoc wrote: post #58

The global push to kill privacy makes me sad. Feels like I grew up in a golden age and subsequent generations won't care because they never knew a different world

Maybe a hot take, but I don't know that "privacy" and "anonymity" are the same thing, or that the latter is worth preserving. I would very much like to live in a world where everyone stood by everything they said online with their real identity, just as they already do in the real world. This was already the case for all of human history until the information age. If you wanted to say something, you had to physically…

I'm not sure I agree, people say unhinged things on TikTok/Facebook using accounts that have their full government name and/or showing face. I doubt deanonymisation would help.

To me "people will be on their best behaviour if they can't be anonymous" sounds eerily similar to Larry Ellison's "people will be on their best behaviour if they're constantly surveilled".

Re: EU to legislate about Chat Control behind closed doors

#187

Post by warumdarum »

Havoc wrote: post #58

The global push to kill privacy makes me sad. Feels like I grew up in a golden age and subsequent generations won't care because they never knew a different world

It was always to be, as sure as the exponential meets the linear. I worry though, about all the unborn ideas, innovations and technologies, which could stabilize the current unstable situation, getting aborted by the surveilance which is introducedto "stabilize" things.

Re: EU to legislate about Chat Control behind closed doors

#188

Post by goobatrooba »

jltsiren wrote: post #48
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.

Most of the time, when "the EU" is doing something bad, it's actually the national governments wearing a different hat. The Parliament is pretty reasonable on the average, while the national policicians in the Council take advantage of the ignorance of the public. They can pursue their favorite policies without consequences, as the EU gets all the blame.

[dead]

Re: EU to legislate about Chat Control behind closed doors

#189

Post by moniosi »

The common fallacy people have regarding chat control (and should be clarified) is that it's not like internet is made of a few select providers, anyone can open an encrypted tcp connection from an ip to another, and the global traffic is too massive to be scrutinized, also the most widely available apps already comply to the single police request to access conversations from suspects. This means that this will create further privacy for criminals such as pedophiles and mass espionage for the common man. It's also curious to notice that at every proposal stage, politicians are always conveniently exempt from the regulation, which is hilarious coming after the Files.

Re: EU to legislate about Chat Control behind closed doors

#190

Post by goobatrooba »

microgpt wrote: post #11
basisword wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

European here. I like the cookie law. It's made it clear to people how much we're being tracked and I can choose to opt out. The implementation could of course be better but the real issue is the scummy web devs choosing to make it as annoying as possible instead of taking the more sensible decision to not have 150 trackers on every page. >> I see a lot of pro-EU content on this site when they're terrible on both tec…

Website operators hate these cookies popups because they make their website more annoying and make me more likely to press the back button and click on a different website. As it should be. This incentivizes them to stop tracking me.

There is no obligation to put a banner of you don't sell your users' data to third parties. The law is very clear that your don't need it for period technical cookies, so it's really always and every time solely about tracking and advertisement money.
Post reply on HN