Live data from Hacker News

EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

patrick-breyer.de

621–630 of 947 posts

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#621
post #600

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some European countries like Germany do, but the EU somehow can override those national constitutions.

It cannot. EU laws are completely useless and must be implemented by every government as a local law, which won't be more powerful than the constitution. The problem is that constitutional courts should then say the law was against the constitution and cancel it, but will that happen?

In theory, it can't. But in reality, it does in important cases.

Germany has implemented EU sanctions against a German journalist, which deprive him and his family of the ability to conduct basically any economic activity in Germany or even to leave the country. He is not allowed to work. No one is allowed to pay him money. He has to petition the government every time he wants to access even a small amount of the money in his own bank account. The same restrictions apply to his close family members, because they are suspected of helping him survive financially. He is barred from crossing any border in Europe, including to leave.

He has not been accused or convicted of anything in court. The only procedure that was required to hand down an economic death sentence was for the EU Commission to put his name on a list.

The German government claims this is all okay, because the journalist can proactively challenge his sanction listing in Brussels. It's a years-long process that will require paying lawyers - using money he is not allowed to access.

Needless to say, this is all highly unconstitutional. But the German government simply doesn't care. They just say they're implementing EU sanctions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H%C3%BCseyin_Do%C4%9Fru

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#622

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 don’t understand how a governing system requires a majority to reject a change to the status quo. The status quo must be maintained unless a majority decides to change the status quo.

It is the equivalent of having a gas pedal in a car that is fully activated unless you put your foot down.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#623

Some people say im rather pessimistic - but i still kinda hoped that the EU will not go down this path. That said - i was obviously wrong. I don't really know what else to say than : this breaks a fundamental foundation of privacy. Sure i was never 100% aligned with EU level decisions (neither with my residing country one's) but that's just... wrong on so many levels... how can i even still argue to people that EU an…

[flagged]

[flagged]

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#624
post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have source for IWF funding being by big tech? Haven’t found anything that breaks their funding down by source and the majority on the UK govt site is from “charitable activities” ( https://register-of-charities.charitycommission.gov.uk/en/ch... )

https://www.iwf.org.uk/membership/our-members/ The top 25 members (£90k+; big tech are here) contributed between £2.25M and £4.37M. The other 110 members contributed between £2.26M and £4.46M.

Honestly they have a lot of members including the BBC for some reason, Apple is one of them. It seems like it might just be good practice to support them, it signals ‘we are against child abuse’. Dropping support could lead to some bad headlines. Seems like an NGO that is really good at sales, probably putting some pressure on it’s members rather than the other way around.

I get that if you are an ngo that really wants to solve online child abuse you’d want a law like this. It may be mostly the ngo pushing for it, not necessarily big tech. I could be wrong.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#625
post #600

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some European countries like Germany do, but the EU somehow can override those national constitutions.

It cannot. EU laws are completely useless and must be implemented by every government as a local law, which won't be more powerful than the constitution. The problem is that constitutional courts should then say the law was against the constitution and cancel it, but will that happen?

The Danish government is pro spying on its people.

Currently we have numberplate recognition everywhere and logging of SMS and position info of phones.

So this is just another step into the direction where we will be watched everywhere by our government in case we step out of line.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#626

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Military spending != military capability and will to use force. For example, Germany spends way more than France on defense but has a less capable military and with no nuclear capability to boot. From force projection capability, the EU is toothless and lacks the spine to twist some arms in order to see its interests represented on the world stage. It's a pushover despite all that military. The reality is that you ne…

> the EU is toothless and lacks the spine to twist some arms in order to see its interests represented on the world stage. The rhetoric right now is just bizarre. Why should the EU force countries against their will using military? Do you have zero idealism or regard for internationally agreed upon rules? Do you want a world where might is right?

> Do you have zero idealism or regard for internationally agreed upon rules? Do you want a world where might is right?

Internationally agreed upon rules don't come from first principles, they're downstream from power. The world was, and will always be, might makes right.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#628
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…

Democracy is when you just try and try again and again until it passes with 51/49. Then its democratic and legitimized and only evil terrorists would oppose those laws we have all democratically agreed upon. Also, see the case of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H%C3%BCseyin_Do%C4%9Fru - if you aren't liked by the EU courts, they just accuse you of "collusion with Russia" and ban your bank account via "sanction policies…

>Redfish forced to cease operations as an official subsidiary of Ruptly/RT

>Immediately after Red Media gets founded by the guy, but now in Turkey

>Redfish social media presence gets renamed to Red Media

>Red Media kept staff, equipment and reused content from Redfish

Tbh I'd be pissed if sanctions could be bypassed by simply changing your logo and handle.

I'd go further and suspect the Russian disinformation apparatus just threw them under the bus for "EU bad" points.

It's such a textbook and standard Russian propaganda practice to finance and push divisive and partial views I'm even surprised people keep falling for it.

Another "journalist" the far left (in Spain at least) considers a martyr. The whole coverage of his arrest was a shitshow (Freedom of expression! Poland is fascist! Freedom for Pablo!)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pablo_Gonz%C3%A1lez_Yag%C3%BCe

Then it was shown he spied on Nemtsov, Polish journalists... and he even hugged uniformed GRU officers upon arrival in Russia as part of a prisoner exchange, while wearing a "my empire needs me" t-shirt.

But this doesn't affect only the far left:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voice_of_Europe

Anti-immigration, anti EU narratives, solid antisemitic (not just anti-Israel) stances, interviews with all sorts of sketchy characters, the whole set. Luckily for de Vlieger, he had sold the operation to literal Viktor Medvedchuk (and then the platform took a further Russia victim, Ukraine bad turn), so he remains unsanctioned.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#629

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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!

That's a good thing. We complain about lack of industrialisation. China has historically protected their fledgling industries, if we want industrialisation back, we need to as well, to the detriment of mindless consumption of cheap stuff
Post reply on HN