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

481–490 of 947 posts

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#481

Post by sneak »

IanCal wrote: post #429
sneak wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. They are already allowed to do this, and already are doing this. When you provide data to the service provider in a non-e2ee fashion, it's the…

They aren’t allowed to do whatever they want with your data, there’s strict restrictions on requiring consent for things you want to do with user data.

Yes, and you consent when you enable iCloud.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#482

Post by mattstir »

Jtarii wrote: post #286
ajsnigrutin wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Real time notifications here would solve a lot of issues... Imagine Alice, an 18, 19yo girl, having a boyfriend, Bob, and since Bob is on a student exchange, she decides to send him a boob photo. Since alice is skinny, her boobs are on the smaller side. Now imagine Alice hitting 'Send', and getting an automated message from whatever CSAM AI bot: "Your message has not been sent, the system detected the breasts in the…

I think a more realistic system would be hashing images and comparing them to known CSAM in some database. I think Apple was going to implement something like this a few years ago before scrapping it.

Such systems are unfortunately trivially defeated by, for example, adding rings of colourful blocks around the edges of the image. If the scanning systems are then updated to notice rings around the image, bad actors will start cutting images in half and adding the colours there, etc. It's a never-ending arms race that's bound to leave regular people worse off.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#484

Post by thin_carapace »

dyauspitr wrote: post #394
bradley13 wrote: post #128

Stupid parliamentary trick: Hold the vote on the day before the summer break - ensuring that many people have already returned to their home countries. Then use a sort of "reverse" parliamentary trick: the default is that this legislation is accepted. They needed an absolute majority - not of voting members, but of all members - to reject it. Result: 314 against, 276 in favor, 17 abstentions, 113 absent The EU is wel…

The internet is pretty stupid now and needs to be reigned in so our sons and daughters aren’t wide eyed zombies. Most of you won’t agree with me but it’s true and something needs to be done so I laud this.

"give me a boy until he is seven and I will tell you the man he becomes"

there will be at least 1 entire generation of western kids that spectated short form content on screens since the moment of birth. based on aristotle, this entire generation is going to be retarded. the EU legislature in question enables legal spectation of content exchanged by a generation of the retarded. the optimal path forward seems to be ensuring that the next generation is not retarded, otherwise human extinction will be rapidly accelerated. I don't see how corporate destruction of individual privacy is going to help ensure that the next generation is not retarded.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#486

Post by rayiner »

teekert wrote: post #38

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…

Wow does it become law if the majority of those present opposed it? The American Congress might be utterly dysfunctional, but we’ve never had a law pass despite the majority of members voting against it. What am I missing?

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#487

Post by mattstir »

sndgndgndgndy wrote: post #387
drnick1 wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unhinged rant, this has nothing to do with Israel.

Wow, I guess governments of the whole western world just woke up one morning and decided to clamp down on the free exchange of information on the internet at the precise moment their citizenry was up in arms over Israel committing mass genocide and blackmailing their politicians. What a coincidence!

Although it would be much more exciting to have some world conspiracy, try to consider what that would mean. That conspiracy's so powerful it can singularly decide votes across a union of dozens of countries, and yet still feels the need to enact a law to invoke that power in the first place.

No, this is a much more benign form of government overreach, one born out of a normal desire to suppress citizens, and perhaps a healthy amount of regulatory capture by large corporations.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#488

Post by [deleted] »

dmichulke wrote: post #100
xaitv wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I don't understand, based on this: https://howtheyvote.eu/votes/195775 the votes are the other way around, with the majority being for. I'm guessing that site has it reversed then or I don't fully understand the proposal? Looking at which politicians from my country voted "no" on this site it seems to be mostly the ones that I'd expect to vote "yes", so that would support this site just having the options revers…

Found this, source: https://fightchatcontrol.eu/ On 7 July, MEPs voted 331–303 to fast-track the return of Chat Control 1.0 mass scanning. A binding vote follows Thursday, 9 July, where an absolute majority of 361 MEPs is needed to stop it. Take action now to demand they defend your private messages. "Yes" means stop control, because it's a "proposition de rejet" we're looking at. rejet = reject. Parties in favor of…

[deleted]

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#489

Post by BeetleB »

aliasxneo wrote: post #282
globular-toast wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

At least I have still have a 2nd amendment - and, at least for now, still post on social media without getting a knock on my door.

> and, at least for now, still post on social media without getting a knock on my door.

That's called "luck".

A friend of mine did likewise, and got a knock, then handcuffs, then a trial. He was acquitted because everything he said was allowed under the first amendment. In fact, several academics had published the same/similar stuff he did and not had any problems (or ever worried about them). But he was of the wrong race/religion...

There was never a time in the 20th-21st century where you can practice your 1st amendment rights and be absolutely sure you wouldn't get a knock on your door.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#490

Post by maxloh »

spikels wrote: post #347
teekert wrote: post #38

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…

Not only was Chat Control 1.0 already rejected twice by the European Parliament but: - This vote took place on last day of the session when many MEPs had already left for Summer vacation - 112 MEPs of 719 didn't vote. - The vote was called only two days before as an "Rule 170 - Urgent procedure" - 73 MEPs missed the vote making it "urgent". Normally it takes months of procedure to come up for a final vote.

I think that means those MEPs are not doing their jobs. They are the representatives of their people, but somehow they left for vacation before the last day of the session. They failed in the most important part of their duty.
Post reply on HN