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

The Going Dark initiative or ProtectEU is a Chat Control 3.0 attempt

mastodon.online

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 300 posts

Re: The Going Dark initiative or ProtectEU is a Chat Control 3.0 attempt

#111

Post by Uvix »

goda90 wrote: post #94
BlackjackCF wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These should be enshrined into law... and there needs to be some sort of rule to prevent lawmakers from trying to ram through laws with the same spirit without some sort of cool down period. The fact that lawmakers have tried to push the same crap multiple times in the last 4 years despite a ton of opposition and resistance is ridiculous.

People need to do a better job of voting out people who push such laws.

Election cycles are unfortunately too long for that to work. Would need to reduce office terms to 2-3 months for "vote them out" to be viable.

Re: The Going Dark initiative or ProtectEU is a Chat Control 3.0 attempt

#113

Post by SiempreViernes »

Xelbair wrote: post #54
delusional wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I find it preposterous that anyone defends this agenda that flips concept of 'innocent until proven guilty' on it's head by collectively punishing everyone for POSSIBLE crimes of some individuals. In a way that any criminal will be easily able to circumvent by not following the law, so it doesn't even achieve it's goal.For example with one time pad exchanged outside of Eu's control + stenography messaging, bundled in…

And I find it exceedingly annoying how all this heated discussion about the dangers of chat control is held oh so far from the actual text of the proposals.

For example: there is no actual proposed text for "ProtectEU", the name references a project to provide updates to legislation with a focus on security. All this talk about criminals circumventing the proposed law using VPN is just dreams you have.

Re: The Going Dark initiative or ProtectEU is a Chat Control 3.0 attempt

#114

Post by kkfx »

Well... Until people will react protecting their own interests we will only go in a death spiral.

Only recently have we witnessed, particularly in the EU but also in the US and Canada, the blocking of personal bank accounts of individuals who were simply "inconvenient" to the ruling class, from Wikileaks to OnlyFans creators, Francesca Albanese, Frédéric Baldan, Jacques Baud, and various players in the crypto world, all without trial, without any crime committed, just unwelcome.

This makes it clear that for Democracy to exist, a balance of power is needed, including internal balance, which requires that the population remains outside the potential control of the State to preserve a significant degree of freedom. Privacy is one of these fundamental freedoms, like freedom of speech, because the ideas circulating can be dangerous, but it is far more dangerous to have someone with the power to prevent ideas and news from circulating.

Re: The Going Dark initiative or ProtectEU is a Chat Control 3.0 attempt

#115

Post by rowanG077 »

Xelbair wrote: post #54
delusional wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I find it preposterous that anyone defends this agenda that flips concept of 'innocent until proven guilty' on it's head by collectively punishing everyone for POSSIBLE crimes of some individuals. In a way that any criminal will be easily able to circumvent by not following the law, so it doesn't even achieve it's goal.For example with one time pad exchanged outside of Eu's control + stenography messaging, bundled in…

Which lobbying group?

Re: The Going Dark initiative or ProtectEU is a Chat Control 3.0 attempt

#116

Post by Uvix »

delusional wrote: post #93
atq2119 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This framing is extremely counterproductive, though. Most societal problems cannot be fixed entirely. There will always be child sex abuse just like there will always be murder, theft, tax evasion, and drunk driving. It makes sense to see if things can be improved, but any action proposed must be weighed against its downsides. Continued action by police is a good thing, but laws for that have been established for a l…

> It makes sense to see if things can be improved, but any action proposed must be weighed against its downsides. This is that. What you are seeing, repeated attempts to discuss a proposal, is the process by which the EU bureaucracy weighs the downsides. When you see it being pushed, that's evidence that some member states do not find "the correct answer" to be "no further change". That will eventually necessitate a…

The people proposing it believe it to be to their own personal advantage. They don't necessarily believe it to be just and fair.

Re: The Going Dark initiative or ProtectEU is a Chat Control 3.0 attempt

#117

Post by SiempreViernes »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #81
delusional wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> Fix the problem the proposal tries to fix, and the proposal goes away. Only it doesn't. Even if you completely solved CSAM, authoritarians would still be proposing things like this to go after "terrorists" or copyright infringers or what have you. Claiming that people can't have privacy unless there is zero crime is just claiming that people can't have privacy, and that'll be a no . Moreover, this proposal wouldn't…

But ProtectEU stuff is about organised crime, terrorism, cybersecurity, and countering Russian sabotage operations, not sure why you brought up CSAM.

Re: The Going Dark initiative or ProtectEU is a Chat Control 3.0 attempt

#118

Post by SiempreViernes »

Uvix wrote: post #116
delusional wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It makes sense to see if things can be improved, but any action proposed must be weighed against its downsides. This is that. What you are seeing, repeated attempts to discuss a proposal, is the process by which the EU bureaucracy weighs the downsides. When you see it being pushed, that's evidence that some member states do not find "the correct answer" to be "no further change". That will eventually necessitate a…

The people proposing it believe it to be to their own personal advantage. They don't necessarily believe it to be just and fair.

The commissioners are porposing

> We will build resilience against hybrid threats by enhancing the protection of critical infrastructure, reinforcing cybersecurity, securing transport hubs and ports and combatting online threats.

for their own personal benefit? What? (Quote from the ProtectEU document)

Re: The Going Dark initiative or ProtectEU is a Chat Control 3.0 attempt

#119

Post by SiempreViernes »

like_any_other wrote: post #67
delusional wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> Fix the problem the proposal tries to fix, and the proposal goes away. Bullshit. We are by far - by FAR - the most surveilled we have ever been in history, including under the worst of the Stasi, yet they lie to us about "going dark". The most minuscule scrap of privacy is a problem to be solved to them.

Yeah, the Irish really should step up their GDPR enforcements.

Re: The Going Dark initiative or ProtectEU is a Chat Control 3.0 attempt

#120

Post by SiempreViernes »

amarcheschi wrote: post #25
torben-friis wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm as pro european as they come, but I think the author didn't deserve a downvote. If there is a moment when the EU could not afford to take hits to their popularity, it is now. And here we are, gifting free shots to anti-EU populists.

Measures such going dark and similar ones are wholly supported - and pushed - by police forces around europe, not by politicians. I do agree that the politician should grow a spine and trust computer scientists for one, since they're the ones making laws after all

> I do agree that the politician should grow a spine and trust computer scientists for one

Trust the computer scientists on how to prevent crime? Uh, well that's certainly creative.

Post reply on HN