EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0 • Hacker News Board

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#221

Post by znpy » Thu, Jul 09, 2026, 3:20 PM UTC

nick486 wrote: post #82

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…

I'm really surprised at the hurry. The EU, and many EU governments, have been ramming through deeply unpopular legislation at a breakneck pace for no apparent reason, lately. It feels like the last turn in a board game where everyone is busy taking points with no regard for the impact of the decisions on the theoretical next turn - because there is no next turn. Its really weird. > blame-laundering mechanism Also, I'…

My guess is that with non-left political movements on the rise better surveillance tools were needed to prevent them from winning the elections around europe.

I really don’t but any other reason, as other tools (legal and technological) are already in place.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#222

Post by bluescrn » Thu, Jul 09, 2026, 3:20 PM UTC

greenavocado wrote: post #218

bluescrn wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

War requires industry. But we've deindustrialised and outsourced the manufacture of almost everything to China.

They will rapidly reindustrialize when the first shots are fired. The EU's goal is the strategic defeat of Russia. What the common people think or want is irrelevant. All environmental and climate legislation that gets in the way will be waivered indefinitely until the war is over 5+ years of drone warfare and 100s of thousands dead.

The drone war will be quite limited by chip production.

And once the chip fabs have been bombed, civilisation is set by by decades, and may end up fighting a lower-tech war.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#223

Post by greenavocado » Thu, Jul 09, 2026, 3:22 PM UTC

bluescrn wrote: post #222

greenavocado wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They will rapidly reindustrialize when the first shots are fired. The EU's goal is the strategic defeat of Russia. What the common people think or want is irrelevant. All environmental and climate legislation that gets in the way will be waivered indefinitely until the war is over 5+ years of drone warfare and 100s of thousands dead.

The drone war will be quite limited by chip production. And once the chip fabs have been bombed, civilisation is set by by decades, and may end up fighting a lower-tech war.

There are many fabs using "last year's" fab processes for defense purposes. Wouldn't be surprised if they had quick and easy way to set up fabs for chip weapons production in bombed out buildings and warehouses. Defense doesn't need civilian fabs. In the end, we, the civilians, stand to lose tremendously.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#224

Post by pohuing » Thu, Jul 09, 2026, 3:22 PM UTC

dismalaf wrote: post #158

attila-lendvai wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

for no apparent rason? the way they are preparing to bring the population into a war hardly can be any more apparent...

War is less imminent now than ever. Ukraine has caused a ton of damage to Russia and at this point the Kremlin has more to worry about than EU countries (pretty much every Russian government ever is brought down from within). No, leftist governments in the EU have failed to provide prosperity and failed in all their promises, now they're going for total control to try to stay in power. Look at France, as soon as Le P…

[flagged]

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#225

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Jul 09, 2026, 3:26 PM UTC

globular-toast wrote: post #215

tasn wrote: post #211

This, and other similar legislation, serve as a constant reminder of why the American founding fathers had to revolt against tyranny, and why constitution amendments like the 1st and 4th exist. The 4th in particular was written as a response to a British law similar to Chat Control (writs of assistance).

Sadly doesn't seem to make much difference, though. If anything the UK is less authoritarian than the US now.

[deleted]

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#226

Post by coldtea » Thu, Jul 09, 2026, 3:27 PM UTC

nick486 wrote: post #82

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…

I'm really surprised at the hurry. The EU, and many EU governments, have been ramming through deeply unpopular legislation at a breakneck pace for no apparent reason, lately. It feels like the last turn in a board game where everyone is busy taking points with no regard for the impact of the decisions on the theoretical next turn - because there is no next turn. Its really weird. > blame-laundering mechanism Also, I'…

>with no regard for the impact of the decisions on the theoretical next turn

They know the impact of the decisions: more power for them as bodies.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#227

Post by ajsnigrutin » Thu, Jul 09, 2026, 3:27 PM UTC

bluescrn wrote: post #203

attila-lendvai wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

for no apparent rason? the way they are preparing to bring the population into a war hardly can be any more apparent...

War requires industry. But we've deindustrialised and outsourced the manufacture of almost everything to China.

And then stop people from being able to afford cheaper stuff from china (without european middlemen) by implementinh a 3eur customs fee on an 1eur phone case!

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#228

Post by coldtea » Thu, Jul 09, 2026, 3:34 PM UTC

random3 wrote: post #150

theodric wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many of us find it difficult to be relentlessly positive as we watch organizations that constantly paint themselves as the epitome of democracy act in a way counter to the repeatedly-expressed will of the people. I cannot smile my way into fascism.

OK, but what does that have to do with the suggestion that saying “nothing will happen” adds no value to this conversation

If it's indeed the case, it adds more value than 100 comments explaining non-happening course corrections, and revolts, and backlashes they believe we'll see.

It's useful to add some cynicism in the mix (or in this case, pragmatism)

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#229

Post by BSDobelix » Thu, Jul 09, 2026, 3:35 PM UTC

inigyou wrote: post #59

miroljub wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It still is. Countries can ignore EU laws if they want to.

I'm not sure what you try to achieve:

>For example, Poland was hit with massive daily fines when it was embroiled in a dispute over rule of law measures, as well as a separate case linked to environmental permits at a coal mine on the Czech border.

>The Commission is allowed to take these fines out of that country’s EU budget allocation, preventing governments from simply refusing to pay up.

https://www.brusselstimes.com/1568198/how-the-eu-punishes-it...

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#230

Post by kode-targz » Thu, Jul 09, 2026, 3:35 PM UTC

mrtksn wrote: post #207

kode-targz wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. The definition of "bad actor" constantly changes. Something you do legally today can and will become illegal in the future, and if you don't change your ways, you will be a bad actor, too. The people pushing for this under the guise of protecting children are the same people who went on The Island, or at least protect those who did. They never cared about children's safety. The biggest criminals of all ar…

Sure, the definition changes but whoever are the bad actors now create the desire to deal with them, which creates a motive or excuse to create or change systems for that. No matter how fair or unfair the treatment is, if you actually manage to stonewall that through technological or other means, those will be destroyed.

I don't think I understand what you're trying to say in this comment, but if by: >if you actually manage to stonewall that through technological or other means, those will be destroyed

You mean some kind of resistance against tyrannical policies, then those "other means", if I understand what you're saying, are often illegal. True resistance that causes true societal change isn't parading the streets with signs or talking to your local representative. It's sabotage, vandalism, and in extreme cases, violence. True activism. The surveillance state's main goal is disrupting such initiatives before they can even get off the ground.