221–230 of 282 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I want them to win. The internet is stupid right now. A culture eating its own tail.
Pray tell, how would stepping closer to a dystopian hellscape help the internet from eating itself? Somehow, having omnipotent watchers is going to make the internet... more fun and welcoming?
I was curious to see how the MEPs voted, you can check it here. https://howtheyvote.eu/votes/195338 For once I'm pleasantly surprised that everyone I voted for was against.
This is so cryptic that I wouldn't even know if for or against would mean for or against 'chat control'
"Against" means that the MEP voted against the extension of Chat Control 1.0
So many comments about the EU constantly re-trying the same law with minor tweaks, and about how legislatures do this in general. I wanted to provide an explanation for this behaviour. The way legislation is expected to proceed in countries with parliamentary systems, especially with strong civil services, is that 1) a problem is identified. This can be the civil service detecting it on their own, petitioning from gr…
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 hop…
Huang style? What does this mean?
https://youtube.com/shorts/u3SY8nvjhQA
Don't give up on core tenets basically; the EU is a (comparatively) great place to live because it's a free place.
We can't have multitudes, be "antifragile" etc through centralization and surveillance.
Even if we were to believe this to be a winning move, it's not how this European project was envisioned and we won't ever be able to truly "compete" at that game.
In these times hence we IMO should be doubling down on the core tenets; freedom being chief amongst them.
Akin to how Huang in that interview alludes to globalization and how it made him / USA a winner.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I suppose the gold standard would be to present detailed arguments from each side with evidence (if any), for context. Barring that, the original question did seem to provide a rough summary of each side’s position. It may be weighted towards the anti Chat Control side, with the formulation “pro says this, but anti says this, and imagine that you are affected”. So perhaps they could have asked a reverse formulation 5…
What scanning means, and how that might affect people and society, are precisely the issues in dispute. A poll which tries to provide arguments and evidence about contested issues cannot yield meaningful results. To pursue this line of reasoning, for example: > Your context-free formulation on the other hand provides no information for voters to weigh. Privacy or child porn detection? Well I guess I’ll pick child por…
I don’t think the voting result would be different if he had been even more fair about this question, as the poll is not something that MEPs are going to care about. This was clearly designed to be passed by any means necessary, and this time they got it through. But at least now people have a poll to use when they campaign to repeal it in the future, or when they want to point to the unrepresentative nature of EU decisions like this one.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> how democratic of the EU Well, these are the MEPs elected by member states. We don’t like the outcome but this means chat control is well supported within the government of each country.
Is it really supported by the people, or just the politicians? If the former, the EU is an autocratic democracy. If the later, an autocratic oligarchy. Either way bad. Only true democracy in Europe is Switzerland where the people actually get to vote on laws.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They only have to win once. You have to win every time.
To repeal it you only need to win once too.
So many comments about the EU constantly re-trying the same law with minor tweaks, and about how legislatures do this in general. I wanted to provide an explanation for this behaviour. The way legislation is expected to proceed in countries with parliamentary systems, especially with strong civil services, is that 1) a problem is identified. This can be the civil service detecting it on their own, petitioning from gr…
People are pushing back on this every single time. Maybe it's time legislators read the room instead? Is there a step for this too?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I understand that you're trying to dunk on me but I don't get what the point is supposed to be. It's certainly possible to come up with other bad ways to ask the question. If someone was interested in genuinely understanding the public's opinion, rather than including a demand to take some particular perspective, they would ask things like "Do you support online platforms scanning all personal messages for child porn…
I suppose the gold standard would be to present detailed arguments from each side with evidence (if any), for context. Barring that, the original question did seem to provide a rough summary of each side’s position. It may be weighted towards the anti Chat Control side, with the formulation “pro says this, but anti says this, and imagine that you are affected”. So perhaps they could have asked a reverse formulation 5…
It's important not to phrase it as "read your messages to detect child porn..." because that implies they won't do anything else with the messages, and Europe is a place where they still assume that if someone says they do X to do Y, they're only allowed to do Y and severely punished for doing anything else.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The trouble with pictures is that when you share them online the platform will likely compress them before serving them to others, spoiling your steganography. I think text-in-text is the way to go. Decrypt that recipe for brownies into the actual message. For example: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.20075
One can host their own private or semi-private forum, chat server, chan board, etc... and choose not to re-encode the images and/or permit .tar .7z .zip archives and so on. Keep the bots away with basic auth to minimize skiddie risk to platform RCE's. It's unlikely people can move their friends to their own platform but the best way I have found is to call it a "fall-back" platform for when Discord and others are tem…
The ideal hiding space would be visible to the public, and indistinguishable from a mountain of other material that's visible to the public--especially if they don't have to log in to see it. That way if a message is found, the search for co-conspirators doesn't narrow at all.