91–100 of 194 posts
[1] https://www.iwf.org.uk/policy-work/preventing-the-upload-of-...
Are you going to arrest someone for writing code? Are you going to arrest people who use private communications? Sounds like a legislator carve out hot and ready to happen.
I get the point, ban E2E, OK sure, but what if some software is designed in such a way that the company doesn't provide it, but it just happens to be compatible with the protocol extension? Are you going to arrest the authors if they don't explicitly ban it?
Yeah, right.
The Chat Control 1.0 rule is simply that organisations like Meta are allowed to scan messages if they want to. In other words your Facebook messages are not private from Facebook. Surely we already knew and expected that. Chat Control 2.0 is the worrying one because it mandates scanning and bans E2EE. These two things should not have both been given the same branding.
> These two things should not have both been given the same branding. the confusion is purposeful, because it is easier to convince people that 1.0 is okay, which makes 2.0 appear like a version bump of the same thing.
Therefore it makes Chat Control 2 a harder sell.
To be fair I think " Control" makes it pretty clesr it's nefarious. They missed the opportunity to call it "Chat Safety".
Tough week for euros. Cars that record your face while driving and now apps snooping on communications.
Perhaps in the future cars will not only record your face but also listen in for hate speech. Most cars have SOS and GPS modules so calling the police if someone in the car shouts a slur is just connecting some code together.
cc 2.0 is a different beast.
I don't understand the EU's position on privacy. On the one hand, they enacted GDPR to give you control over access to your personal data. On the other, they need access to all of your data.
The unquestioned view in certain circles - including here - is that when the EU/UK does something that chips away at people's online privacy, there's un ulterior motive. It's entirely possible that politicians just want to do something about CSAM and young people having their mind twisted by social media. The electorate do seem to be keen on some sort of action.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Perhaps in the future cars will not only record your face but also listen in for hate speech. Most cars have SOS and GPS modules so calling the police if someone in the car shouts a slur is just connecting some code together.
Why do you think this is only going to be in Europe? This will be the global norm modulo some astroid hitting earth or civilizational crash. The trajectory is crystal clear: access to information (AI), control over personal finance (CBDC), privacy of personal communications (handful of big tech MITM in everything), metered social interactions (today China, tomorrow the world over).
It doesn't even need guns; Nepalese youth managed to stop social media censorship there just by going to the political capital and threatening to beat the MPs to death.
This is about 1.0, which sounds ok - it basically allows providers a legitimate exception from data privacy laws to scan for CSAM in not E2EE communications. I reckon gmail, iCloud mail and the like already scan attachments for malware and emails for phishing scams, now they can also scan for child abuse. cc 2.0 is a different beast.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I feel like this one should not be removed because people want to continue discussing and that's easier on a newer thread.
Easier? You mean easier to duplicate? No need to split up the discussion. There's the link, welcome to continue discussing over there, instead of pushing the news back in front of the rest of those who may not have missed it.