Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Chat control: EU Commission presents mass surveillance plan on May 11

patrick-breyer.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 338 posts

Re: Chat control: EU Commission presents mass surveillance plan on May 11

#111

Post by alwayslikethis »

fuckcensorship wrote: post #82
schroeding wrote: post #50

I'm just tired, to be honest. Even if we prevent this exact law (proposal), a few years down the line there probably will be another attempt. And again, and again. Just like it happend with the mandatory data retention laws for ISPs. I really try to stay optimistic on this topic, but it's really hard. :/

I have come to accept that the only long-term solution to digital privacy must be in the form of technology. No amount of vigilance and democracy will be able to keep the wolves away forever.

It has not really been a technological problem for a long time. End to end encryption is mature technology. Human institutions require humans to function, and humans are easily swayed based on circumstances in a way that make them willing to simply hand over their rights.

Re: Chat control: EU Commission presents mass surveillance plan on May 11

#112

Post by DocTomoe »

PortiaBerries wrote: post #75
DocTomoe wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The very idea of the EU is to move control away from democratically elected governments. It is designed to prevent democratic participation of its people. The one direct democratic structure, the European Parliament, is toothless, and being defanged, and the Commission is an organisation made up by politicians you want to get rid of at home (because of looming political scandals usually). Can't get your dystopian pol…

How can it be a "crazy idea" to leave what you describe in your first 2 paragraphs? Crazy just economically?

In the end, most people are even happy living under the most brutal of dictatorships as long as they themselves live a relatively comfortable life, and for that you need a working economy (and the hand of luck protecting you from being in the group that said dictatorship thinks the scapegoat should be).

The same is much more true for "well, this is essentially not a democracy anymore, and has some weird tendencies, but at least we're not forced to salute the flag every morning in school" style systems.

Re: Chat control: EU Commission presents mass surveillance plan on May 11

#113

Post by thriftwy »

FpUser wrote: post #44

These pathetic fucks should stop pretending to worry about children. What they really want is subversive populace living under the constant threat of being made criminals. FFS China, Russia, India etc are proud of you.

In Russia it has started with "child porno" blocking.

Fast forward 10 years, the list of things your web site may be blocked for is unbound.

So it's not just slippery slope, rather an euphemism.

Re: Chat control: EU Commission presents mass surveillance plan on May 11

#114

Post by mdp2021 »

denton-scratch wrote: post #37

This looks like a scare-story. Firstly, the EU produces directives and regulations; it doesn't produce "laws". Secondly, the phrase "child pornography" is in quotes, as if there's no such thing. There is such a thing. Thirdly, the imputed "law" requires service providers to scan encrypted messages. That's impossible, unless the proposal is to ban properly-encrypted messages. If that were the proposal, then surely tha…

> is in quotes, as if

You cannot read what people write the way /you/ would read it if you wrote it. So, you have to place lots of partial confidence values. Others for that quote place more bets in, "he could have placed the opening quotes of figurative speech two words earlier" (i.e. "under a pretense of a fight against Evil...").

Re: Chat control: EU Commission presents mass surveillance plan on May 11

#115

Post by denton-scratch »

JacobiX wrote: post #74
denton-scratch wrote: post #37

This looks like a scare-story. Firstly, the EU produces directives and regulations; it doesn't produce "laws". Secondly, the phrase "child pornography" is in quotes, as if there's no such thing. There is such a thing. Thirdly, the imputed "law" requires service providers to scan encrypted messages. That's impossible, unless the proposal is to ban properly-encrypted messages. If that were the proposal, then surely tha…

The EU has many types of legal acts and the European Commission is responsible for planning and proposing law. Also EU regulations are legal acts that apply automatically to all EU countries without needing to be transposed into national law. For scanning encrypted messages, they can be scanned on device before encryption, like Apple’s approach to CSAM.

My "device" is a laptop. You say "like Apple", but I believe Apple's CSAM is unique - nothing else tries to scan your messages between keyboard and encryption.

Re: Chat control: EU Commission presents mass surveillance plan on May 11

#116

Post by alwayslikethis »

andai wrote: post #52
oxff wrote: post #35

For the longest time I have been treating every communication that's not private, in-person with someone I know as essentially public (iow. this changes almost nothing to me, I consider anything online more-or-less public, under surveillance etc already).

Most in-person conversations today take place near internet-connected microphones (and more recently, integrated with smart-assistant technology specifically designed to collect your voice data).

In person conversation that occurs in a pre-approved 10x10 meter anechoeic chamber without any microphones.

Yeah. It's that difficult.

Re: Chat control: EU Commission presents mass surveillance plan on May 11

#117

Post by arcticbull »

caterpi11ar wrote: post #108
arcticbull wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Abortion is especially strange since a supermajority of Americans, across the political spectrum, of both genders, generally agree that some abortions should be permitted [1]. 70% want to keep the status quo. [2] It's even arguably a violation of the religious freedom of Jewish folks to ban abortion [3]. It's not forbidden by the Bible either - the Bible makes it clear that life begins 'at first breath' (Genesis 2:7)…

That Bible passage is about God blowing His breath into Adam who was non-biological clay up to that point. It has nothing to do with Adam taking his first breath. Obviously, Adam was never a foetus, nor was he a child, nor a teenager. As according to this passage life starts when you are a full grown man, should we allow abortions into the 108th trimester?

the Old Testament does say you can stone your belligerent child to death outside the city walls if you like (Deuteronomy 21:18-21 [1]) - after all, what is the death penalty if not a very late abortion plus some due diligence?

However, more interestingly, do you think you could cite where (a) the Bible forbids abortion or (b) the Bible makes clear that life begins at any point prior to birth?

[1] https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%202...

Re: Chat control: EU Commission presents mass surveillance plan on May 11

#118

Post by marto1 »

joebob42 wrote: post #6

I don't understand who wants this. does any of their actual constituency want it? Or is it literally just the actual elected officials getting power hungry? Stuff like abortion, etc where I don't really understand the other side. I've at least met real people who are pro life. I've never met the people who want these clownish surveillance things but they keep coming up anyways.

> I've never met the people who want these clownish surveillance things

I'd guess the much older folks that don't use any of these means of communication wouldn't be strongly opposed and will probably be voting for some social benefit carrot program that is included as part of the package.

That said I have no data on this whatsoever and am just speculating.

Re: Chat control: EU Commission presents mass surveillance plan on May 11

#119

Post by EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK »

GaylordTuring wrote: post #83

In theory (and in practice today), I’m strongly against this. However, I see a future where you will have to choose between mass surveillance or something close to extinction. I might be wrong, but as technology progress, it seems almost inevitable that a single individual can do more and more damage. An amount of damage it took half an army to achieve a couple of hundred years ago, one individual can do today with t…

An evil individual can easily defeat mass surveillance, because there is inherent asymmetry in encryption. She can encrypt her evil messages with, say, 6-words passphrase that no government would be able to crack no matter how many billions of dollars they throw at the task.

Mass surveillance only works against innocents and low-wit criminals.

Re: Chat control: EU Commission presents mass surveillance plan on May 11

#120

Post by tablespoon »

reedjosh wrote: post #17
PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Needlessly cynical. Human organizations of all kinds have problems, including governments. If you don't believe that government can ever function in a manner intended by the people it nominally represents, then everything is hopeless, since we (the vast majority of people) were also screwed over without representative government. I don't agree that one needs to conclude this. You can believe in government at the same…

> since we (the vast majority of people) were also screwed over without representative government. Without government we at least had choice. I think you're needlessly cynical. Humans can organize themselves quite well when they have maximum choice as individuals. The robber barons of the early nineteenth century were bolstered by governments--not hindered. Governments have always been corrupt.

> Without government we at least had choice.

Yes, the choice between surrendering to the bandit (who happens to be stronger than you) or getting shot by him.

Post reply on HN