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

731–740 of 947 posts

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#731

Post by aosaigh »

fosk wrote: post #729
munksbeer wrote: post #724

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The Commission refused to withdraw the proposal after Parliament rejected it, leaving it on the table. The Council disagreed with Parliament’s rejection, formally forcing a second reading. Both the European Commission and the Council itself are not DIRECTLY elected EU bodies. Potato, potahto, tomato, tomahto.

Again, sources?

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#732

Post by kypro »

Eueudhsbsj32 wrote: post #534
kypro wrote: post #501

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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..

> Who is the "political class" of the EU?

Highly educated people, often from wealthy backgrounds, who are very globally orientated.

They are generally not representative of the average person in Europe.

They are the people who European government appoints.

> 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..

I agree, but not sure that directly contradicts what I said?

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#733

Post by fosk »

aosaigh wrote: post #731
fosk wrote: post #729

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Commission refused to withdraw the proposal after Parliament rejected it, leaving it on the table. The Council disagreed with Parliament’s rejection, formally forcing a second reading. Both the European Commission and the Council itself are not DIRECTLY elected EU bodies. Potato, potahto, tomato, tomahto.

Again, sources?

Parliament rejects the proposal: https://oeil.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/en/procedure-file/pdf?r...

Council pushes it forward: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2026...

From the last article: "The Council position will now be examined by the European Parliament, under second reading.". Note that this is technically accurate under absolute majority rules for rejection (not for approving), but practically is where the "cheating" happens - as described in my original parent comment - because of the perverse procedures of the EU that are designed to basically make it almost impossible to go against the agenda.

The Commission did not withdraw it: no source because it stayed "pending".

The EU procedures are maliciously designed against the Parliament while preserving the technicality of plausible deniability. How do we call this architecture in software? We call it a "backdoor", except this one is embedded in the EU legislative process.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#734

Post by Hugsbox »

Eueudhsbsj32 wrote: post #540
thin_carapace wrote: post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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.

The content children in Asia are exposed to seems to be entirely different in nature. For instance, with Tiktok: it intentionally pushes brainrot content for western users, while in China it pushes educational and in general positive content. Speaking only from what I've read on the subject, and I'm entirely willing to accept that I'm wrong about that, but the point remains that the screens aren't the issue, it's the content on them that is.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#735

Post by LtWorf »

petesergeant wrote: post #718
wojciii wrote: post #625

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> The Danish government is pro spying on its people. It would be more surprising if the organisation ultimately responsible for security did not want to.

UK is full of cameras… is it any safer?

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#736

Post by Hugsbox »

protocolture wrote: post #587
thin_carapace wrote: post #561

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the opening quote is attributed to aristotle

Ok but the opening quote doesn't say "I agree with this poster that these kids will be retarded"

My brother in christ, please, reading comprehension. The opening quote is saying that a child's formative years will decide how they turn out.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#737

Post by ben_w »

geysersam wrote: post #615
mattstir wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Such systems are unfortunately trivially defeated by, for example, adding rings of colourful blocks around the edges of the image. If the scanning systems are then updated to notice rings around the image, bad actors will start cutting images in half and adding the colours there, etc. It's a never-ending arms race that's bound to leave regular people worse off.

Don't you think modern image analysis tools such as llms will be easily defeated by measures such as adding colored rings? A couple of years ago you could add some pixels to an image to change it's automatic classification from cat to ostrich. But the tech has improved and I think the race has now firmly been won by the side trying to de-obfuscate images, and only in rare scenarios can images actually be obfuscated e…

> Don't you think modern image analysis tools such as llms will be easily defeated by measures such as adding colored rings?

The LLMs think one specific mystery plant in my garden hiding behind the hedge is velvetleaf; no, wild cotton; no, linden; no, hibiscus; no, mulberry; no, knotweed; no, paulownia; no, catalpa; no, hydrangea; no, grape vine; no, pokeweed.

Many of these claims were trivial for me to falsify with a quick image search, they don't look much like each other or my mystery plant. The things the AI "identified" were often simply not true of the photo.

Basically, even with current tech, you go straight back to false positives and false negatives: https://arxiv.org/abs/2111.06628

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#738

Post by vaylian »

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…

Hard disagree on the conclusion. I agree that the commission and the council have made very unfair moves and it's justified to call them out for it. But we have also seen that the parliament (except for the EPP) was for the most part eager to listen to what people had to say about chat control.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#739

Post by munksbeer »

fosk wrote: post #733
aosaigh wrote: post #731

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, sources?

Parliament rejects the proposal: https://oeil.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/en/procedure-file/pdf?r... Council pushes it forward: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2026... From the last article: "The Council position will now be examined by the European Parliament, under second reading.". Note that this is technically accurate under absolute majority rules for rejection (not for approving), but practi…

The EU Council are the democratically elected leaders of the member states. How is them deciding the direction not "democratic"?

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#740

Post by lou1306 »

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…

The Council must go at some point. It is a "legislative" body... composed of members of the _executive_ branch of the individual countries. Granted, that's not the only problem with EU governance, but it is a rather glaring anomaly in terms of transparency and accountability.

Furthermore, at least in the case of Italy & other parliamentary systems, there's something like 3 levels of indirection between the people and their "representative" in the Council:

People elect members of the Parliament -> MPs decide who is the Prime Minister -> PM decides who sits in the Council

We should likely just replace it with either a "EU Senate", where each country elects the same number of senators, _or_ a chamber with truly European elections (as in, every EU citizen may vote for any candidate, regardless of their nation). But the latter option seems still out of reach as of today.

Post reply on HN