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

EU proposal to scan all private messages gains momentum

cointelegraph.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 230 posts

Re: EU proposal to scan all private messages gains momentum

#191

Post by raxxorraxor »

azmodeus wrote: post #37
sackfield wrote: post #32

This pops up every few years, and I bet once it gets in it never goes away. It seems asymmetric that one side only has to win once to win permanently while the other side has to win constantly. Is there any mechanism to stop this in the EU and make this kind of legislation explicitly barred?

Vote them out and never vote for their parties in your general elections If your Member of European Parliament supports chat control stop voting for their parties and politically support their opposition

Every member (aside 2 crazy people I believe) of the European Parliament voted for age verification and more user surveillance. It isn't salvageable.

Maybe it is a result of sending the biggest idiots off to the EU when they failed in national politics, but the problem remains.

Re: EU proposal to scan all private messages gains momentum

#194

Post by raxxorraxor »

pmg101 wrote: post #117

Something the HN discussion on this topic just like the UK online safety act seems to ignore is that this kind of legislation has broad support among voters. I'd say in general people are more concerned about The Bad People than about privacy. Probably because they mostly trust their governments, certainly more than they trust Big Tech.

Big tech and government is a false dichotomy though and these people are idiots. That is why we have right enshrined, for example that surveillance is prohibited.

And gladly Telegram does not cooperate. That is a feature.

Re: EU proposal to scan all private messages gains momentum

#195

Post by raxxorraxor »

integralid wrote: post #25

I'm against any kind of censorship, chat scanning and privacy violations. Nevertheless: >Telegram founder Pavel Durov warned that France risks societal collapse if it continues down a path of political censorship and regulatory overreach. Durov was arrested in France in August 2024 after being accused of failing to moderate his app to reduce criminality Telegram is the messenger of choice for cybercriminals (not sign…

Telegram has become a huge market for artists exchanging commissioned work. There are "eccentric" people on Telegram, but this is just FUD.

Re: EU proposal to scan all private messages gains momentum

#196

Post by t0bia_s »

azmodeus wrote: post #37
sackfield wrote: post #32

This pops up every few years, and I bet once it gets in it never goes away. It seems asymmetric that one side only has to win once to win permanently while the other side has to win constantly. Is there any mechanism to stop this in the EU and make this kind of legislation explicitly barred?

Vote them out and never vote for their parties in your general elections If your Member of European Parliament supports chat control stop voting for their parties and politically support their opposition

You still belive that vote solve anything? Divide and conquer is strong indeed. We should focus to abandoning giving our responsibility to unknown electorate.

Re: EU proposal to scan all private messages gains momentum

#197

Post by W3zzy »

integralid wrote: post #175
W3zzy wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a flex that will result in great pushbacks. If my government feels the need to monitor all my communication without proper reason I know they're only a step away from using my words against me. I will oppose any government that outlaws encryption and privacy. There are numerous accounts of peoples personal info being misused for crime. More than there are proven cases of encryption being used by criminals.

I'm not sure I was understood. I explicitly explained my stance on encryption at the beginning. I neither have nor want to have the capability to spy on telegram users. But criminal groups use telegram as infrastructure all the time - for example telegram webhook used as a exfiltration method for stolen credentials. Telegram refuses to cooperate in any way, for example to close the group chat exfiltrated credentials…

I wasn't challenging you. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

Re: EU proposal to scan all private messages gains momentum

#199

Post by frm88 »

integralid wrote: post #175
W3zzy wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a flex that will result in great pushbacks. If my government feels the need to monitor all my communication without proper reason I know they're only a step away from using my words against me. I will oppose any government that outlaws encryption and privacy. There are numerous accounts of peoples personal info being misused for crime. More than there are proven cases of encryption being used by criminals.

I'm not sure I was understood. I explicitly explained my stance on encryption at the beginning. I neither have nor want to have the capability to spy on telegram users. But criminal groups use telegram as infrastructure all the time - for example telegram webhook used as a exfiltration method for stolen credentials. Telegram refuses to cooperate in any way, for example to close the group chat exfiltrated credentials…

Is undermining encryption in private messaging the right way to go about these issues tho? If telegram's and Facebook's non-cooperation in persecution of crime is the issue, why not address the corporations with legislation up to and including an EU wide ban instead of violating the privacy of 450M people? Is there something I'm missing?

Re: EU proposal to scan all private messages gains momentum

#200

Post by munksbeer »

Y_Y wrote: post #45
sackfield wrote: post #32

This pops up every few years, and I bet once it gets in it never goes away. It seems asymmetric that one side only has to win once to win permanently while the other side has to win constantly. Is there any mechanism to stop this in the EU and make this kind of legislation explicitly barred?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ratification_of_the_Treaty_of_... Like when the Irish electorate rejected the Lisbon Treaty, and then was then harangued into accepting a reheated version. Opponents of the treaty reasonably asked if it could be best-of-three.

I'm failing to understand the problem here. The Irish rejected the proposed treaty, the took that rejection and the reasons, went back to rework it, and asked if the next version was suitable, and it was.

That sounds exactly like you'd expect it to work, and yet people seem outraged by it.

Why?

Post reply on HN