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

531–540 of 947 posts

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#531

Post by [deleted] »

globalnode wrote: post #506
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…

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.

[deleted]

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#532

Post by rayiner »

Barrin92 wrote: post #528
rayiner wrote: post #504

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

>Why do you need a system with seven different bodies more than one of which can make what’s effectively laws? because the European Union contains more than 600 million people and almost 30 very diverse countries (and is a supranational, not federal body). It's institutions also do mirror the structures of most other large unions. The Commission is an executive body, the parliament is a legislative body, and the coun…

If the purpose is to avoid centralizing power, why can the Commission make regulations that have the force of law without consent from either Parliament or the Council?

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#533

Post by smashah »

drnick1 wrote: post #352
sndgndgndgndy wrote: post #333

If you so much as mention that this bill was passed to censor criticism of Israel, you will yourself be censored. Our politicians don't actually represent us.

Unhinged rant, this has nothing to do with Israel.

This is Pegasus by Policy. There is a reason why all Epsteinist Occupied Governments are pushing the same thing worldwide and that reason is so Israel can commit future Holocausts in peace and quiet.

Israel is the horcrux of Emnity towards Freedom. This is why they destroy freedom everywhere they infect the halls of power.

Yet people remain in denial because genociding third worlders is regular programming for Epsteinists.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#534

Post by Eueudhsbsj32 »

kypro wrote: post #501
rayiner wrote: post #486

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 rega…

Who is the "political class" of the EU?

In the US, it seems more obvious how corporate money pulls the political strings, but my impression is that corporate influence is a lot weaker in Europe..

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#535

Post by Barrin92 »

rayiner wrote: post #532
Barrin92 wrote: post #528

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Why do you need a system with seven different bodies more than one of which can make what’s effectively laws? because the European Union contains more than 600 million people and almost 30 very diverse countries (and is a supranational, not federal body). It's institutions also do mirror the structures of most other large unions. The Commission is an executive body, the parliament is a legislative body, and the coun…

If the purpose is to avoid centralizing power, why can the Commission make regulations that have the force of law without consent from either Parliament or the Council?

it can't. Any new regulation goes through the parliament and council as a legislative act. What the Commission can do, if a legislation already exists, is pass regulation that doesn't modify essential elements. There's a direct analog to this in the US, Federal Agencies which end up doing a lot of the actual technical rule making work.

If the FAA decides to make some aviation regulation that's binding through the entire country, and likewise if EU parliament and council have adopted legislation for say, the emission rates of cars the Commission then goes and decides the actual rules. In this particular case of Chat Control 1.0 it was put to a vote, but they didn't reach the majority they needed because apparently a significant number of representatives weren't even there. Of course politically a bit of a dirty trick to push something through like this before a summer break, although I'd say the blame is on the representatives, not the Commission.

These kinds of institutions, and really in most countries they do most of the implementation work are necessary because you can't have your legislative vote on thousands of technical details of how cars or planes work, that's just a technocratic reality regardless of where you are.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#536

Post by Forgeties79 »

joe_mamba wrote: post #422
buellerbueller wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Jacques Baud (Swiss) and Xavier Moreau (French) citizens, got sanctioned by the EU[1] on the basis of "acting as mouthpieces for pro-Russian propaganda and spreading conspiracy theories". Sanctioning means asset freezes, debanking and travel bans, virtually a slow and painful sentence to homelessness and death since you won't be able to travel, have a bank account, a job, own or rent anything under sanctions. I don't…

Were they found to be guilty of “acting as mouthpieces for pro-Russian propaganda and spreading conspiracy theories"? If so, well…

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#537

Post by smashah »

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!

Some people would happily set a bonfire to our collective rights and freedom and democracy if it meant Israel could continue the harvest of children in the third world. Instead of admitting that, they feign denial.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#538

Post by smashah »

mattstir wrote: post #487
sndgndgndgndy wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Next you will tell Arendt that The Banality if Evil had no host ideology at the time.

What did you see in The Zone of Interest? Just a documentary about a benign family?

Or are some humans worthy of more analysis than others?

Shame.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#539

Post by Eueudhsbsj32 »

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.

[flagged]

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#540

Post by Eueudhsbsj32 »

thin_carapace wrote: post #484
dyauspitr wrote: post #394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 e…

Why just western kids? Cell phone and tablet use by little kids in Asia is on a whole other level.
Post reply on HN