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

EU Council Approves New "Chat Control" Mandate Pushing Mass Surveillance

reclaimthenet.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 449 posts

Re: EU Council Approves New "Chat Control" Mandate Pushing Mass Surveillance

#171

Post by snvzz »

tiborsaas wrote: post #89
IlikeKitties wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Hi Mom, please install this peer to peer dark net chat to talk to me in the future, thanks Oh honey, why don't we just use iMessage instead. Thx bye.

This seems a bit more polished: https://tryquiet.org/ But some friction is to be expected.

More? You sure not mean less?

SimpleX, and especially Tox, are much more mature. They're not newcomers.

They are only lacking in users, as they don't have the marketing resources companies like Slack or Discord do.

Re: EU Council Approves New "Chat Control" Mandate Pushing Mass Surveillance

#172

Post by citrin_ru »

cbeach wrote: post #120
exasperaited wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In 2029 it's likely we'll have a more libertarian government Haha you're so funny. If Reform get from, what is it right now, five -- or four, or six, depending on how the wind blows — MPs to 326 MPs, which is enough to secure the majority they think they are getting, then libertarian is not what that government will be. It will be populist, white and significantly authoritarian, because pure tabloid authoritarian t…

> libertarian is not what that government will be How can you be so sure? Why do you assume that everything that the Reform chairman, Zia Yusuf (head of policy) is lies? What, from his history, suggests that he is a liar? > catastrophic issues already affecting Reform councils like Kent. A small number of councillors left, but KCC is still a strong Reform majority. Councillors come and go throughout the year (just lo…

> But I've never understood why popular polices get such a bad rep in a supposed democracy?

Because they are extremely short shortsighted and a wreck in a long term.

Re: EU Council Approves New "Chat Control" Mandate Pushing Mass Surveillance

#173

Post by saubeidl »

forgetfulness wrote: post #92
basisword wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> that does not lend itself to be democratic, because it is way longer than most people's attention span The attention span of the general public _shouldn't_ matter. That's why we elect politicians.

That could still be democratic in principle if it weren’t for lobbyists If legislative processes are so drawn out and complex that no more than a handful of ordinary citizens could keep track of them, the advantage that paid lobbyists have over the public is enormous

That's where Unions and NGOs come in. Their job is to be lobbyists for the people, against corporate power.

Re: EU Council Approves New "Chat Control" Mandate Pushing Mass Surveillance

#175

Post by pasiaj »

saubeidl wrote: post #159
sneak wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The purpose of the state is continuity of the state. The state is always the natural enemy of the people - specifically the liberty and privacy of the people. Any time you have a government, you will have a government that wishes to spy on you to make sure you will never attempt a competing government/army.

[flagged]

You seem to mistake an ideal for reality and forgo a few difficult eventualities: eg. tyranny of the majority, corruption, regulatory capture, etc.

Re: EU Council Approves New "Chat Control" Mandate Pushing Mass Surveillance

#176

Post by jonkoops »

genericacct wrote: post #149
piker wrote: post #6

Even living nearby in the UK it blows my mind how quickly the EU proposes, kills and then revives and passes controversial legislation in such a short timeframe.

TFA mentions "european governments" but this legislation is proposed by a bunch of european members of parliament who in no way represent any governments and much less the commission or the union. In short it tries to depict a group of old farts as an overreaching snooping authority. I wonder who could have a vested interest in depicting the EU as a repressive regime...

This legislation is not proposed by members of parliament, only the commission can draft legislation, the parliament can only approve it.

Re: EU Council Approves New "Chat Control" Mandate Pushing Mass Surveillance

#177

Post by saubeidl »

Xelbair wrote: post #143
arlort wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it doesn't, people are just embarrassingly ignorant of how the EU legislative process works so when a vote to give first approval to a text is cancelled before it takes place journalists and reddit all over pull out the mission accomplished banners and when a negotiating position is approved everyone has a surprised pikachu face The "proposal" was made something like 3 years ago, the killing never happened an…

The issue is not with the lack of understanding of "process". But sheer frustration because there's nothing you can do as just a citizen. An unelected council of !notAyatollah has decided, and this thing is being pushed at glacier slow pace. If EU is a trade union this is a severe overreach, if EU wants to be a federation, there's not enough checks and balances. This is the crux of the problem. The issue is that this…

The Council is a meeting of the heads of state, all of which are elected in their respective countries.

Your problem is with the leadership of countries, not with the EU as an institution. I agree that it is a problem btw, but I think you got the wrong culprit. This isn't pushed on the states by the EU, this is the states using the EU to push it and launder the bad publicity.

Re: EU Council Approves New "Chat Control" Mandate Pushing Mass Surveillance

#178

Post by ptero »

saubeidl wrote: post #159
sneak wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The purpose of the state is continuity of the state. The state is always the natural enemy of the people - specifically the liberty and privacy of the people. Any time you have a government, you will have a government that wishes to spy on you to make sure you will never attempt a competing government/army.

[flagged]

Depends on the specific incarnation of the democracy. Not infrequently in elections the majority sees the choice as the one of the lesser evil.

Re: EU Council Approves New "Chat Control" Mandate Pushing Mass Surveillance

#179

Post by d_k_f »

saubeidl wrote: post #159
sneak wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The purpose of the state is continuity of the state. The state is always the natural enemy of the people - specifically the liberty and privacy of the people. Any time you have a government, you will have a government that wishes to spy on you to make sure you will never attempt a competing government/army.

[flagged]

The state might be comprised of people, but unless everybody is directly involved in the final decision process you'll always have (at least) a principal-agent problem between the people acting as political representatives and everybody else.

Re: EU Council Approves New "Chat Control" Mandate Pushing Mass Surveillance

#180

Post by saubeidl »

d_k_f wrote: post #179
saubeidl wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

The state might be comprised of people, but unless everybody is directly involved in the final decision process you'll always have (at least) a principal-agent problem between the people acting as political representatives and everybody else.

As you do in most things in life.

Do you grow your own food? Do you refine your own oil? Do you write your own contracts?

I would assume you pick somebody to do those things for you because one human can't do literally everything.

Post reply on HN