EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

Post by Hugsbox » Fri, Jul 10, 2026, 10:13 AM UTC

inglor_cz wrote: post #304

belval wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Would they not be in favor of _less_ regulation so they can provide services to their users with fewer legal considerations? Regulatory capture. If the handling of user messages requires constant scanning and there are enough rules that you need a team of lawyers, then only Google, Meta and Apple will be able to afford it.

I cannot imagine Musk simply submitting to this sort of EU demand, and he has enough hue-and-cry capability on X to maneuver other tech firms into very uncomfortable positions in the same regard.

Post by realityking » Fri, Jul 10, 2026, 10:18 AM UTC

gorgoiler wrote: post #565

joe_mamba wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only in some bubbles. But most normies I know are massive EU fanboys and showing them the malicious things the EU is doing, they just shrug at best, or call you a Putin supporter at worst. They'll only realize this when the jackboot is on their neck. But probably not even then because in some EU countries government obedience is like a religion.

I recommend my own personal democracy metric: your level of democracy is proportional to how easily you can shout “moron!” at your representative and have them hear you. Do you know who they are, can you find them at a public meeting, and will they be able to hear you? For the EU, all three combine to give a pretty low score. As we’re seeing in the UK right now, if you stump up £500 and find ten people to counter-sig…

Post by RealityVoid » Fri, Jul 10, 2026, 10:22 AM UTC

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.

Post by redsocksfan45 » Fri, Jul 10, 2026, 10:25 AM UTC

modo_mario wrote: post #238

Thraway198 wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that it's justified. SOME immigration is needed in order to save "duh economy," but what we got instead was economic warfare against workers.

It's not even that some migration is need to save the economy. You'd need pronatalist policies or you're going to be doing that "some immigration" for ever and ever.

Post by fosk » Fri, Jul 10, 2026, 10:26 AM UTC

munksbeer wrote: post #724

fosk wrote: post #719

The EU is a farce, an undemocratic virtue signaling organization, and this is why: - The Parliament voted against the first reading of this proposal twice in 2026, the first time they only supported limited cases for it, while the second time they actually defeated it fully. - The Commission didn't care, and kept the proposal on the table by refusing to withdraw it. - Once the Commission does that, the proposal goes…

Please could you cite your sources for this. I think what you've typed is not representative of what happened here. My understanding is that the EU Council forced this second-reading, not the Commission. To provide evidence for my argument: https://fightchatcontrol.eu/ Look at "Timeline". This is the Council, not the Commission. This is your elected heads of state. This is "democracy" in action. "Council and EPP atte…