11–20 of 947 posts
This article seems to make good points about how useless and invasive Chat Control 1.0 is, but then posits Chat Control 2.0 as the answer. Is the latter not also terrible for privacy, demanding backdoors in all encrypted chat tech?
And so, step by step, in the name of child protection and similar excuses, we lose liberties and rights one by one. Welcome to the Brave New 1984 We World. Big Brother loves us. We are living through the time best described by Zamyatin, Orwell, and Huxley.
Slippery slope is fine and all but do you have any constructive argument?
Europe would be a much better place if the EU stayed what it was, a trade union of sovereign nations without any political power over the people.
Who is working on that? I suspect the main challenge is not technical, but human - persuading users to switch messenger apps is almost impossible.
What changes with the return of Chat Control 1.0—and what stays the same:
*What is coming back:* US tech companies are once again allowed to scan private messages without a warrant or prior suspicion. This affects direct messages on platforms like Instagram, Discord, Snapchat, Skype, and Xbox, as well as emails via Google’s Gmail and Apple’s iCloud.
*What remains unchanged:* Public social media posts and files hosted in cloud storage could already be scanned without this law. Furthermore, private messages can always be reported by users, or monitored by authorities using targeted, court-ordered wiretapping.
*What is still NOT being scanned:* End-to-end encrypted chats, such as those on WhatsApp, have always been exempt from these scans. Additionally, European providers of messaging and email services have never implemented chat control measures.
So, E2E is unaffected?
I don't want to hear about the EU's "strong digital privacy" laws and protections ever again.
There can exist strong consumer protections against misuse of their personal data by various entities.
And there can simultaneously also exist governmental overreach against citizens private data.
The world is complex, few things are truly binary.
Roberta Metsola's actions this week jeopardise the legitimacy of the EU project as a whole. It's clear that member countries use the EU as a blame-laundering mechanism to pass domestically unpopular laws, but the forcing of this vote under the urgency procedure that requires absolute majority to reject, on the last EP session before summer break is so blatant that it might awaken people that might've overlooked the s…
If it's not a dictatorship, a regime, a shithole, a kleptocracy, or whatever name they use for a government they don't like, I don't know what it is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Slippery slope is fine and all but do you have any constructive argument?
Constructive argument? Just disband the EU as a whole, including all laws, treaties, contracts ... Europe would be a much better place if the EU stayed what it was, a trade union of sovereign nations without any political power over the people.