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

Chat Control passed first round in EU Parliament

heise.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 282 posts

Re: Chat Control passed first round in EU Parliament

#71

Post by musha68k »

This is the anti-EU move but they simply don't understand that.

Authoritarian centralization efforts need to be fought Huang style - with an European twist - as we might be behind on a lot of axis but we "Didn't Wake Up a Loser".

China / US leadership must not be the carte-blanche to formalize whatever low bar in how we handle our own privacy; going straight for the "self own" I guess?

Sorry for prompt mode but I hope this is at least somewhat legible to fellow Europeans, if not please listen to antirez in original Italian or auto translated:

https://youtu.be/cmYiWsFn3GM

I hear quite a few tangents in there; the main one being: especially in EU we need to go "agentic". Don't wait for politics to do The Right Thing. They should play retrospective backup at best.

I'm thinking they might be actually thankful for having been provided vision / imagination.

Team up with the bureaucrats after the fact but don't listen to them too much - again - to Do The Right Thing. Especially when they are potentially infected by lobbyists...

FFS I hate this timeline; we really need to show up for real. Again and again and again and again...

Re: Chat Control passed first round in EU Parliament

#72

Post by echelon »

soco wrote: post #30
iamnothere wrote: post #2

From a post on Mastodon: > democracy is when you repeatedly push for unpopular laws until they pass, and the more times you do it the more democratic it is It is unlikely that 60 additional “no” votes can be found by Thursday to stop this.

So basically the people we elected will vote yes. How's that undemocratic? Because the majority doesn't vote the way I like it? I'm not even ironic, I truly don't understand those comments. You get what you voted for, garbage in garbage out.

They keep voting on surveillance state measures that the oligarchy wants that will limit the freedom of the people.

They keep voting and voting and voting until the energy of the people to protest diminishes or they find a way to get it in.

There needs to be a counter-balance where politicians can be removed or even punished by the people for proposing unpopular bills.

Re: Chat Control passed first round in EU Parliament

#73

Post by cucumber3732842 »

big85 wrote: post #48

The Wikipedia entry on Chat Control doesn't go into enough detail on what exactly it does , only the history of its legislative process. Can someone update it?

It's probably line item 156/289 on some intern's list of things to check once a week and make sure it "looks good". Politicians engage in just as much publicity management as big corporations do.

Re: Chat Control passed first round in EU Parliament

#74

Post by delusional »

Balinares wrote: post #54
belowavgiq wrote: post #3

"The procedure now chosen gives the proponents of Chat Control a significant tactical advantage. Since the law is in its second reading, an absolute majority of 361 votes of all parliament members is required for amendments or a renewed rejection on Thursday. In contrast, a simple majority of the MEPs present is sufficient for the other side. As many parliamentarians have historically already departed by the last day…

> So, if I'm reading this correctly, Chat Control [2.0, implied] is bound to become law? Nope. This is bad, but not THAT bad. This is an extension of the existing Chat Control 1.0, which was set to expire (or maybe already has, I didn't keep track). AIUI it gives chat companies permission to scan user chats for illicit content, but does not mandate it. This is bad, but it's not the much worse still Chat Control 2.0 t…

> or maybe already has, I didn't keep track

Literally second paragraph.

> to reinstate the transitional regulation for Chat Control, which expired in April

Re: Chat Control passed first round in EU Parliament

#75

Post by cucumber3732842 »

iamnothere wrote: post #34
osigurdson wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I don't understand is, what kind of legitimate criminal would not use such techniques? Are bank robbers planning things out on iMessage? If so, presumably they won't be criminals for very long. Therefore these types of initiatives only impact the innocent and inept but still active criminals.

The purpose of these efforts is not to catch criminals, at least not primarily, it’s to map the spread of “dangerous” ideas and the networks behind them. In other words, to prevent effective political change. Found a new problematic meme? Someone leaked a video of you taking a bribe? Someone published a photo of damage from a missile strike? Add it to the database of forbidden media and quickly track down the source.

They'll make sure to catch just enough criminals that when you say it's all bullshit some snooty waste of oxygen on HN can say "well akshually" and link you to some cherry picked news story that makes it all look like a good thing because they caught some small time house painter dumping waste paint in the sewer or nabbed someone for selling vapes to teenagers.

Re: Chat Control passed first round in EU Parliament

#76

Post by rsynnott »

big85 wrote: post #48

The Wikipedia entry on Chat Control doesn't go into enough detail on what exactly it does , only the history of its legislative process. Can someone update it?

Part of the confusion is that there are two things involved here; 'Chat Control 1', an existing (but expiring) derogation to the ePrivacy Directive which allows, but does not require, providers to scan messages. 'Chat Control 2', which you'll likely have heard more about, would _require_ providers to do this. The wiki article is quite poorly written and implies that 1 is an earlier version of 2, which isn't really the case.

Anyway, this is about Chat Control 1.

Re: Chat Control passed first round in EU Parliament

#77

Post by delusional »

poly2it wrote: post #61
soco wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So basically the people we elected will vote yes. How's that undemocratic? Because the majority doesn't vote the way I like it? I'm not even ironic, I truly don't understand those comments. You get what you voted for, garbage in garbage out.

The vast majority (72%) of European citizens are opposed to Chat control. Regardless, the proposal has been brought up and rejected relentlessly, mostly by action of politicians (commissioners) who are not directly elected to begin with. We have more than enough reasons to be furious. https://www.patrick-breyer.de/en/poll-72-of-citizens-oppose-...

Did you read the question of that survey? Talk about poisoning the well.

Re: Chat Control passed first round in EU Parliament

#78

Post by zuzululu »

Talked to a fellow European coworker recently and they seem very supportive of chat control and that it was necessary to stop "far right nationalism" and then I pressed on for them describe what it is and they got angry and refused to clarify. I think this is a good snapshot of where Europe is right now that chat controls have become politically weaponized and people who are supportive of it seem clueless as to what it actually is proposing.

Future looks very dim for EU as a whole, I'm glad I left it for America

Re: Chat Control passed first round in EU Parliament

#79

Post by ryandrake »

iamnothere wrote: post #2

From a post on Mastodon: > democracy is when you repeatedly push for unpopular laws until they pass, and the more times you do it the more democratic it is It is unlikely that 60 additional “no” votes can be found by Thursday to stop this.

They only have to win once. You have to win every time.

Re: Chat Control passed first round in EU Parliament

#80

Post by miroljub »

big85 wrote: post #69
miroljub wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just assume the worst: all your private messages would be read and shared between all governments and corporations in the world.

No, I want to know specifically.

The answer is already specific, but not complete.
Post reply on HN