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

671–680 of 947 posts

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#671

Post by gmueckl »

NamlchakKhandro wrote: post #471
ivan_gammel wrote: post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do not think this is true. Do you have any proof? I‘m aware only of German court refusing to apply urgent procedure to unblock his bank accounts. The sanctions were applied not that long ago for him to get decision by German courts or ECJ.

Sounds like something a Russian colluder would say

No, this is a valid point. Court cases are usually playing out slowly amd carefully. So, in order to prevent harm to the parties involved caused by that slowness, injunctions can be issued by the court that can provide reasonable relief from immediate damages from the dispute that can't be compensated for or reversed later. In Germany, getting relief through an injunction really is about proving that lasting damage is caused while the case drags on. The full merrits of the case are explicitly excluded from consideration.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#672

Post by monssooon »

shangofox wrote: post #500
monssooon wrote: post #476

To me as a European, this is not only about the dystopia that is becoming the tech survailance of society but it is a perfect example of what I feel the EU is. It is a disgusting dysfunctional institution that should have never been created in my opinion. This is what we have... Unelected bureaucrats using every opportunistic tool they can to, in my opinion get rid of democracy. What are we fighting for at this point…

As a European shouldn't you know this is just a renewal and nothing new. The weird voting system applies too.

It is a renewel of something highly unpopular that was voted down already. It is how the EU operates look at the other comments here about "democracy". It is put to vote on last minute where they know MEPs are on vacation... Well the ** should not go on vacation before the vacation starts but that is just another thing about EU! Why are they in vacation before it starts?! It is so complicated rules that not even the news and experts totally understand what is going on.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#673

Post by Towaway69 »

vixen99 wrote: post #588
hintymad wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honest question: when Europeans give so much power to EU and usually favor regulations by the government, isn't it natural that the government will try to implement more control? And it looks EU officials do not have to accountable for anything. They will not suffer personally even when their policies wreck havoc. I don't quite understand why Europeans can trust EU at all. Case in point, EU HQs shut down its air cond…

I don't understand either but just for reference on your point: Trust in the EU is at its highest in 18 years '52% of Europeans trust the EU, the highest result since 2007. The level of trust is highest among young people aged 15-24 (59%). Setting another 18-year record, 52% of Europeans say they trust the European Commission, with scoring again particularly high among young citizens (57%). At the same time, 36% of E…

> 52% of Europeans trust the EU,

Who was asked, i.e. tourists visiting Brussels? How many were asked? How were they asked, i.e. leading questions such as "you do like the EU don't you"? Who didn't respond?

And more importantly, who is doing the asking? Oh, the EU itself is doing the asking. They are, of course, not biased in any way at all.

These numbers are then provided by the same folks that just timed a vote on our privacy when a) MEPs were known to be on holidays b) reversing the vote procedures, i.e. the 'no's have reach a set minimum c) are happy to sign away our collective privacy.

All that for 52% - all time high. When I was going to school, 52% wasn't a score that I went home to my parents with and told them how good things were going - even if it was an "all time high".

Crazy, how the EU have mixed up mediocrity with democracy.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#674

Post by hraxz »

Eueudhsbsj32 wrote: post #539
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.

[flagged]

This is such a simpleton thing to say.

All I know is I am glad I am childfree and don't have to deal with this.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#676

Post by mike_hearn »

Ruphin wrote: post #261
budududuroiu wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Internet Watch Foundation, the group, funded almost entirely by big tech, who pushed for this vote to be held under emergency procedure, is already at work lobbying for the end of E2EE [1]. In a couple years time, Chat Control 2.0 will come about, and the same tyrants will use the EU admission [2] that there is no evidence that suspicionless scanning of private communications has led to an increase in criminal co…

Why would big tech be in favor of having to scan message content? It puts more regulatory requirements in place on their activities. Would they not be in favor of _less_ regulation so they can provide services to their users with fewer legal considerations? If big tech _wanted_ to they could already backdoor their encryption and scan the message content, they don't need regulation to do that. The only thing that chan…

It's confusing because of the indirection.

The Internet Watch Foundation is one of these NGOs that makes lists of hashed child porn images and URLs. All the big tech companies subscribe so they can coordinate on blocking child porn, as they are legally required to do.

Unfortunately the IWF is also a "charity" and thus engages in political lobbying. Because like all such NGOs they have a single purpose, they lobby for making that purpose easier irregardless of other costs, which they view as out of scope. It's obviously easier to watch the internet if tech firms are forced to watch everything all the time, so that's what they're in favour of.

People actually working at tech firms on messaging systems don't want to do this, however. So they end up funding people who are undermining their own policies. This is very common whenever NGOs get involved e.g. governments funding NGOs that directly undermine the government's own efforts.

The fix would be for tech firms to leave the IWF and set up their own alternative organization that doesn't engage in lobbying activity. However, that would require a lot of cross-org agility that is difficult for big companies to achieve even internally, let alone across the industry, and the leadership is all thinking about AI anyway not EU stuff where they already just assume the EU is going to regulate them all the death anyway. So inertia carries the day.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#678

Post by Jensson »

ToValueFunfetti wrote: post #570
WatchDog wrote: post #568

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US constitution is one of the few constitutions that _does_ grant rights[0]. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Bill_of_Rights

That page specifically says the constitution grants rights to the government and reserves the rights of the people. There is a lot in there about the case against the bill of rights, a big part of which is that itemizing the rights implies that they are limited to the list. Editing to clarify that this isn't just semantics: under the 'grant rights to the people' model, a government that grants one set of rights is ju…

So that means there it offers zero protection against private corporations? It seems like that is a bad idea, isn't it better to say people have rights that nobody is allowed to violate instead? Like freedom of speech doesn't matter much if private corporations are allowed to silence you.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#679

Post by wolvoleo »

akimbostrawman wrote: post #610
sunshowers wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look, you can either let people make a living and manage their own lives while contributing to society, or you can not let them make a living and ensure they're housed and fed. You can't be angry at A and also be angry at B.

Nice framing. How about C: not letting in a flood of financial refugees with completly different cultural values in the first place or at least send them back at some point instead of giving them free citizenship and all its benefits as justification for them working here or not being able to work?

Just admit then that it's not about jobs, housing or anything else but you just don't want to see brown faces in the street?

PS: Part of the issue with sending them back is that the countries they're from won't take them. They can't live at the airport like Tom Hanks either.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#680

Post by 21asdffdsa12 »

Yank all the panopticon-levers that push social stability till the lever breaks, because that is all the levers you got.

Social Networks to push ideas and memes, that work against social-decomplexification parties and individuals.

There are also the other leviathan cybernetic levers- like implants- if you need insulin, or hearing aids- you are basically a deputy for social stability. Thus every prosthesis-citizen you can produce is a good citizen.

But it may still not be enough to prevent decomplexification events like Khemer Roughe or the Taliban.

Thus, push technology that allows for quick recovery, because somewhere some serverfarm with the most patient tutor survives.

Scenario-tree-root-hardening looks like this from the inside.

PS: Fuck you Peter - but its work that needs doing. The retarded don't herd themselves. Or they do, but if they knew- all the simulations would be worthless.

Post reply on HN