Chat Control 1.0 and 2.0 Explained • Hacker News Board

Re: Chat Control 1.0 and 2.0 Explained

#261

Post by wartywhoa23 » Wed, Jul 08, 2026, 9:41 AM UTC

latentsea wrote: post #206

Asmod4n wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The system we got for this is called parenting. And there is a saying where I grew up: you need a village to raise a kid, I feel like we lost track of that and feel the issues of that now. Btw, von der leyen is trying to get stuff like this written down as laws since 2009, it got her the nickname Zensursula.

> The system we got for this is called parenting And it fails miserably.

Do you realize you'll end up in fascist dystopia where your children belong to the state, with this line of thinking?

Or is that where you want other people to end up while you peddle propagandist fairytales about failed parenting?

Re: Chat Control 1.0 and 2.0 Explained

#262

Post by master-lincoln » Wed, Jul 08, 2026, 9:45 AM UTC

pona-a wrote: post #242

mdp2021 wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look at this other piece in the frontpage: > Every new car sold in the European Union must include a driver monitoring camera (allaboutcookies.org) the eu should never have been born. The above are its results - and just an example. How do we fix that disaster?

And the US wanted to install a breathalyzer in every car a few years back. How is this supposed to prove anything?

That was a law in France from 2012 to 2020 too (breathalyzer needs to be on board). It was not on European level and it has been removed.

Re: Chat Control 1.0 and 2.0 Explained

#263

Post by taneq » Wed, Jul 08, 2026, 9:45 AM UTC

latentsea wrote: post #203

mikaeluman wrote: post #53

Most everyone would love to see more work on stopping child sexual abuse. But this is the ultimate "grant me dictatorial powers so I can do good" play. Rather than narrow and specific - it's a broad based law that suddenly touches everyone even though offenders are a small percentage and should be able to be targeted more efficiently.

At some point we just have to accept the kids as collateral.

What, like with guns? Never!

Re: Chat Control 1.0 and 2.0 Explained

#264

Post by eunos » Wed, Jul 08, 2026, 9:45 AM UTC

mikaeluman wrote: post #53

Most everyone would love to see more work on stopping child sexual abuse. But this is the ultimate "grant me dictatorial powers so I can do good" play. Rather than narrow and specific - it's a broad based law that suddenly touches everyone even though offenders are a small percentage and should be able to be targeted more efficiently.

> Rather than narrow and specific - it's a broad based law

Because narrow law is easier to avoid or find the loophole and a single case is enough to induce panic and anger.

Re: Chat Control 1.0 and 2.0 Explained

#265

Post by u8080 » Wed, Jul 08, 2026, 9:45 AM UTC

MrGilbert wrote: post #194

emadb wrote: post #192

What european parties or people are pushing for chat controls?

Conservatives and right-wing. Gives them more control. It‘s a pattern that gets obvious once you see it. It’s so they can hide their own secrets better. In Germany, we have a law that grants you access to information, the "Informationsfreiheitsgesetz“. This was used in the past to uncover morally wrong or illegal behavior, mostly done by the conservative party. This party, as they are currently in charge, is now acti…

This again, according to https://fightchatcontrol.eu/ for Germany, Chat Contol is generally supported by de-facto left-wing(support immigration, social security, LGBT movement, positive discrimination, progressive tax, worker rights) CDU and CSU (29 of 34 "Yes" votes with 97 votes in total)

Re: Chat Control 1.0 and 2.0 Explained

#266

Post by master-lincoln » Wed, Jul 08, 2026, 9:49 AM UTC

mdp2021 wrote: post #213

cynicalsecurity wrote: post #8

To everyone who wants to dismantle the EU: this is not the solution. Dismantling the EU is like burning down your own house just to get rid of flies. The UK left the EU and implemented its own version of chat control - Online Safety Act - without any transparency or real opposition. The right solution is the political fight. Europe is our home. We must keep it in good shape by getting rid of anything that makes it wo…

Look at this other piece in the frontpage: > Every new car sold in the European Union must include a driver monitoring camera (allaboutcookies.org) the eu should never have been born. The above are its results - and just an example. How do we fix that disaster?

by educating our fellow co-citizens about who to vote for. This is not an issue of the EU, but about the politicians in power and them caving in on lobbyists from economy side and fascists

Re: Chat Control 1.0 and 2.0 Explained

#267

Post by sensanaty » Wed, Jul 08, 2026, 9:49 AM UTC

pembrook wrote: post #174

wredcoll wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your comment seems to frame this as a "two sides issue" as if it was a see-saw and you can only move back and forth between one side and the other with no room for nuance or alternate directions. Governments can do a lot of things that hurt you, this is a consequence of having power. Giant Corporations can also hurt you because they also have power. In general I would agree that say, walmart, is mostly interested in…

> Your comment seems to frame this as a "two sides issue" as if it was a see-saw and you can only move back and forth between one side and the other with no room for nuance or alternate directions. No. My point is you should fear centralized power in general, and in exact proportion to the scope of the power being centralized. All power gets abused. Governments are centralized power on a scale that makes the most pow…

Yeah 'cause we've never had private corporations like Coca Cola or Chiquita Bananas hire paramilitary forces in South America before.

Both large gov't and large corpo are horrible and both should be equally avoided.

Re: Chat Control 1.0 and 2.0 Explained

#268

Post by u8080 » Wed, Jul 08, 2026, 9:52 AM UTC

master-lincoln wrote: post #248

on_the_train wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

the party program doesn't state it, but some high figures were caught talking about it. E.g. Björn Höcke and Maximilian Krah. They did not mention "brown people" as gp states, but called out people foreign to the local culture.

What's so undemocratic if current inhabitants of some land do not want foreign culture influence in their society?

Re: Chat Control 1.0 and 2.0 Explained

#269

Post by master-lincoln » Wed, Jul 08, 2026, 9:53 AM UTC

inigyou wrote: post #98

janpmz wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't the EU rather like a single point of failure?

No, every country remains sovereign. Hungary's previous regime ignored the EU for over a decade. Many countries are instituting border controls again despite the Schengen agreement.

These are the biggest issues in the EU. You make it sound like a positive thing. These countries erode the trust in law and exploit the subsidies.

Re: Chat Control 1.0 and 2.0 Explained

#270

Post by wartywhoa23 » Wed, Jul 08, 2026, 9:53 AM UTC

pqtyw wrote: post #66

Zufriedenheit wrote: post #28

They claim to protect consumers and privacy and then push this creepy surveillance state.

Well it's privacy from private companies. The government still needs to see everything you do just in case. Its not like you have anything to do hide? Do you?

I really hope this was /s.