Live data from Hacker News

EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

patrick-breyer.de

501–510 of 947 posts

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#501
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?

> What am I missing?

Nothing really.

Some will disagree with this, but this is neither new or surprising behaviour from the EU. In the EU if the political class want something, it doesn't really matter what the public want or vote for.

In the US a lot of your dysfunction is from the fact that your political system actually "works". You maniacs actually can vote for someone like Trump (twice), and he can do stuff regardless of how unpopular he is among the political class.

Here in Europe things like democracy and freedom of speech are only permitted if our political class approves. We can decide things like tax rates, but some things we're not allowed to express opinions on, and some things we have no power to vote for or against.

With some exceptions most European democracies work like this and EU is really the gold standard of this system. They have lots of ways to do what they want regardless of how popular it is, and regardless of what the opinions of our elected representatives are.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#503

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's called "luck". I think it's actually called statistics. In 2026, it would seem I'm statistically less likely to get arrested for a social media post in the US than the UK. I mean it's not like the reason is hidden. Arrests typically require crossing into narrow unprotected categories under the First Amendment: true threats (Virginia v. Black standard), incitement to imminent lawless action (Brandenburg v. Oh…

Luck is statistical :-)

Then we agree that it's not unreasonable for me to feel confident I am unlikely to get arrested in the US over a social media post than in the UK, which is the whole point I was making all along.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#504
post #458

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here in the UK, a large proportion of the population still think the EU is a good idea... Despite all the evidence proving otherwise.

I know I do. I think the main purpose of the EU is to prevent wars between European states by providing a forum for compromise and cooperation. I’d say it’s succeeded in that nicely since its founding. Not one war between member states despite ongoing disputes. Seems like a very good idea. I hate this law though, it’s undemocratic.

Okay, but couldn’t a more transparent and accountable structure have accomplished the same result? Why do you need a system with seven different bodies, more than one of which can make what’s effectively laws?

For example, why have an elected parliament that can’t even originate law, but an unelected commission that can make regulations that are effectively laws?

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#505
post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They thought climate change was the next war-level crisis, and worked towards that. Did we though? At least in Germany a bunch of anti-climate-change projects and changes have been and are being canceled and we're going back to coal and diesel. It seems we're optimizing to have no results and negative progress at the moment.

Germany dismantled their nuclear reactors because russia would always be a reliable partner. European leaders have been absolute traitors.

Nuclear and Coal. What an optimistic nation. Both are coming back I think.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#506
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…

EU cant claim the moral high ground anymore with the way this was done. They've joined the rest of the world now. This was a win for foreign companies and makes me wonder if the EU has been infiltrated by outside interests.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#507
post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed, this happens when you sacrifice public dialog for short-term gains calling everyone who does not agree with your points "far-right", "nazi", "russian asset". There will be literal fascists and people will support them just because they promise(probably bait-and-switch, but does not matter) to address public problems instead of gaslighting that problems are non-existent.

We call them that because it's true. The far right parties don't want to solve problems. They thrive on anger and hate. If they actually would solve something people would stop voting for them. Because anger and hate are the only things they have to offer. They don't care about solving problems around migrants. It really boils down to people just not wanting brown faces in 'their' streets.

> It really boils down to people just not wanting brown faces in 'their' streets.

Its similar to Trumpism in that sense, if you ask afd voters for example they will talk about migration and crime. Must all be racists. The mainstream discourse ends there.

From a leftist pov I think its the dissatisfaction in the cartel party that makes this scapegoating popular in the first place. There are many meaningful ways that peoples material conditions are worsening, which is ignored by the establishment, then a new party comes along and blames it all on migrants. The fact the afd calls itself "alternative" is telling perhaps, it directly challenges the neoliberal "there is no alternative" (Thatcher) / "alternativlos" (Merkel) doctrine.

Germany almost 4x its defense spending, they spend hundreds of billions on defense while cutting social and infrastructure spending. Germany has neolib austerity literally written into their constitution since 2009 (debt break), interestingly the afd voters believe the inverse, that the german government has been over-spending for decades and there is no austerity which they actually want. But they also believe the cdu are leftists so there is that, just shit in their brains at the end of the day so how do you really make sense of it?

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#508

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Luck is statistical :-)

Then we agree that it's not unreasonable for me to feel confident I am unlikely to get arrested in the US over a social media post than in the UK, which is the whole point I was making all along.

For you, yes.

But not for some other folks in the US.

If you want to invoke statistics, I'm sure 99% of UK citizens are confident they won't get arrested over a social media post either. They probably worry about it a lot less than you would if you moved there.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#509
post #460

God..why.. Do the citizens have no say in this??

The citizens do have a say: they vote in elections. This is a temporary law that was implemented 5 years ago so everyone had a chance to vote in the 2024 EU election and vote out those who supported this law. But most people don't care if a company like Meta is allowed to scan their messages. For those who care, they can always use an encrypted messaging service like Signal or Telegram.

Yeah, right, this is just complete bullshit. Let's just put it this way: so, given that you more aware than "most people", did you at least vote against those who support it, and did you try to persuade your friends to do that, but they just didn't listen?

I really don't feel like I can affect anything at all. First of all, even if we assume for the sake of argument that voting for MEPs is important, it's really hard to judge what you are voting for. It's not like they come with clear agendas that people carefully evaluate before they decide how to vote. It's a long running joke how USA elections are choosing between "a giant douche and a turd sandwich", and whatever you choose doesn't even matter because they won't keep their promises, but, hey, at least everyone knows their promises. This one is blue, that one is red, both will let you down in the end, but you kinda know what their general vibe is. Voting for MEPs on the other hand — they are all kinda grey and I couldn't tell you how'd they vote on this particular issue. Depends on your country, but in my case many of them simply weren't MEPs on 2023 vote. And I'm kinda surprised by some of the choices.

Second, I don't really feel that MEPs are that important. They impact almost nothing. All real work is done behind the closed doors by some unknown people, and half of them all happen to be Maltese for some reason (0.1% of EU population, by the way). Parliament in the majority of cases just votes "for all good things and against all bad things" and the actual things that will come to haunt us are usually some small details in the Appendix that were never even explicitly put on the vote.

And when MEP's vote does matter, well, we get something like in this case. The majority objected, but that doesn't matter.

By the way, a couple of years ago I was asking myself, how could it be that we choose von der Leyen to be the President of EC? Well, I don't think we ever did. I surely didn't. MEPs barely did. Never once in all of the history EP rejected a candidate proposed by Council. Whatever each member of the Council did we'll never know, this is not disclosed. And to add the cherry on top, in this particular case it was a record number of MEPs who actually voted against her. It doesn't matter. Here we all are.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#510
post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This is a nice piece of democracy right here: this is just eu in a nutshell, the irish were made to vote on both nice and lisbon treaties twice (both were voted no in the first vote)

Well, the No vote triggered some adjustments, so this is indeed relatively democratic. What would be the alternative?

The revised law not passing until it gets a majority would seem more democratic.
Post reply on HN