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

EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

patrick-breyer.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 947 posts

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#31

Post by BSDobelix »

Y-bar wrote: post #15
petcat wrote: post #4

I don't want to hear about the EU's "strong digital privacy" laws and protections ever again.

Multiple things can be true at the same time. 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.

But now you have governmental overreach and legalized spying on European Citizens by (mostly) US Companies, so i would say that Law is truly binary bad.

Also how the Law was forced is extremely bad.

But hey it's once more proof that the EU is not a democratically spirited institution.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#33

Post by mrtksn »

lrae wrote: post #24
mrtksn wrote: post #14

FTA: 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 h…

Yes. Chat Control 2.0 was the big one in those regards. (Also, LOL @ Skype mention.)

Then I'm not very moved about this. I always assumed that anything unencrypted is scanned one way or another. What I care is not having a backdoor for E2E, i.e. like client-side scanning telling me what I am allowed to talk about like with the LLMs. CSAM excuse is a great excuse to turn every conversation to what we have with AI today.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#34

Post by sham1 »

miroljub wrote: post #12
Otek wrote: post #3

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.

How would this have worked in practice though? How could things like trade standards been harmonised or a common currency adopted without the trade union being able to do legislation?

And once you get there, you're no longer a trade union. Or a trading block, which is probably the better word since a trade union already means something else.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#35

Post by budududuroiu »

miroljub wrote: post #16
budududuroiu wrote: post #6

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…

Yes, this basically means the EU pushed a new censorship regulation using lawfare tricks without ever having a majority vote for the proposal. 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.

The regulation was rejected today with 314 votes against, 276 in favor, and 17 abstentions, but because of Metsola's lawfare that classified this regulation as under an "urgent procedure", an absolute majority was required to reject.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#36

Post by xienze »

Avicebron wrote: post #27

I'm curious where I can go to see real regularpeople who support this, is there like a different side of reddit, comments section? I don't know anyone who is blatantly anti-privacy and I want to hear their reasoning. Otherwise this just seems to be the EU rolling into a weird distributed autocracy without anyone blinking an eye.

It's not so much "support" as "not caring." Most "regular" people, when they hear about measures like this, say "oh no, the government can see my boring text messages to grandma, who cares", much they same way they shrug off the dangers of having a robot vacuum live-streaming the inside of their house to China ("there's nothing interesting in my house, who cares").

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#37

Post by inigyou »

miroljub wrote: post #16
budududuroiu wrote: post #6

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…

Yes, this basically means the EU pushed a new censorship regulation using lawfare tricks without ever having a majority vote for the proposal. 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.

Chat Control 2.0 is the censorship regulation. Chat Control 1.0 just legalized what Facebook was doing anyway.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#38

Post by teekert »

This is a nice piece of democracy right here:

"a measure it had rejected twice in March. Although a majority of voting Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) actually opposed the regulation (314 against, 276 in favor, 17 abstentions), the motion to reject it failed to secure the required absolute majority of 361 votes. As a result, mass scanning is now permitted again until 2028."

"Oh no we can't get a majority to pass the law!"

"Have you tried getting a majority to not pass the law?"

"Worth a shot!"

"It worked, should we also do this multiple times?"

"Of course not! Pass the law, quickly!"

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#39

Post by Vinnl »

budududuroiu wrote: post #6

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…

To understand whether/to what extent this is brazen, I'd be interested to learn the reasoning why urgency procedures are possible, and in particular, why the apparent majority against shouldn't have been enough, and what is needed to classify something as urgent.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#40

Post by inigyou »

BSDobelix wrote: post #31
Y-bar wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Multiple things can be true at the same time. 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.

But now you have governmental overreach and legalized spying on European Citizens by (mostly) US Companies, so i would say that Law is truly binary bad. Also how the Law was forced is extremely bad. But hey it's once more proof that the EU is not a democratically spirited institution.

It still remains true that Mark Zuckerberg will get arrested if he is caught using the data for anything other than child porn scans.
Post reply on HN