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

EU Council forces Chat Control via fast-track

heise.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 278 posts

Re: EU Council forces Chat Control via fast-track

#191

Post by penguin_booze »

joe_mamba wrote: post #42
m132 wrote: post #27

The central bank, council, and commission have to get thoroughly investigated. The amount of questionable decisions coming from those three in the recent (15) years is extremely unsettling. The parliament and courts are practically the only institutions preventing things from hitting the fan at this point, and struggling to do so, it seems.

>The central bank, council, and commission have to get thoroughly investigated. By WHO?! They are THE (unelected) ruling elite. Who's gonna prosecute them?

By WHOM!!

Re: EU Council forces Chat Control via fast-track

#192

Post by Yokolos »

embedding-shape wrote: post #181
jasonvorhe wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If any of this was about protecting children, that Epstein thing wouldn't have been buried and forgotten already.

The whole Epstein sage is very closely tied to the current US administration, I haven't seen much of it being tied to anything about the EU Council. I think you might confuse the government ties Epstein had, at least the ones we knew about.

You think the European wealthy are innocent of pedophilia? What about Prince Andrew? This goes far beyond just the current US administration.

Re: EU Council forces Chat Control via fast-track

#193

Post by vrganj »

sunaookami wrote: post #133
vrganj wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Call it what it is: Propaganda designed to stir anti-EU sentiment from groups that would benefit from being able to divide and conquer Europe.

You see an article about how the EU tries to force a law after it got struck down by forcing it through with a legal trick and all you can think of is how any comment that critizes this is propaganda? Get a grip

Its not "the EU" that tries to force the law, it's the Council.

You know what the Council consists of? The heads of national governments.

You know who they're having to force it through against? The EU parliament, an actual EU-level institution.

The more accurate read would thus be "national governments are trying to force this against the will of the EU".

The fact that you come away with the exact opposite read is a good demonstration of said propaganda's effectiveness.

Re: EU Council forces Chat Control via fast-track

#194

Post by int_19h »

flumpcakes wrote: post #69
SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess I'm not sure what's dubious here. The article says they're circumventing "democratic control bodies", but I don't know what that means (perhaps it's a more common phrase in German?), and it sounds like the European Parliament can still vote to reject Chat Control if they don't want it. The article strongly implies there's something dubious going on here, but to me what would be dubious is a procedure that pre…

Perhaps the article is biased. The simple fact is that a law that existed since 2011 and expired in April is now back in effect. So we are back where we were on February. I don't remember moving from an anti-democratic hell scape to serene democratic beauty back in April so it's probably a nothing-burger. I often see news articles that trade on the fact the general populace aren't professional bureaucrats and so fram…

Perhaps your democracy has been in decline for some time now?

Re: EU Council forces Chat Control via fast-track

#195

Post by int_19h »

Ray20 wrote: post #135
sph wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is it with Danish Social Democrats and wanting to enact mass surveillance at any cost?

Isn't this natural for any "Social" ideologies? They imply a system of centralized redistribution, which implies a powerful repressive apparatus and an omnipresent surveillance system.

No, it is not, and no, they do not.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism

Re: EU Council forces Chat Control via fast-track

#196

Post by embedding-shape »

Yokolos wrote: post #192
embedding-shape wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole Epstein sage is very closely tied to the current US administration, I haven't seen much of it being tied to anything about the EU Council. I think you might confuse the government ties Epstein had, at least the ones we knew about.

You think the European wealthy are innocent of pedophilia? What about Prince Andrew? This goes far beyond just the current US administration.

> You think the European wealthy are innocent of pedophilia?

You think children should be executed in the streets? Neither of us said any such thing, why ask that as a question even?

My only point being that Epstein himself doesn't seem related to EU Council, based on facts, while he was very close friend of the current sitting US president, and the whole thing is still being actively swept under the rug by the US Justice Department. Two governments located on two different continents...

Re: EU Council forces Chat Control via fast-track

#197

Post by int_19h »

pessimizer wrote: post #139
stavros wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't the mere fact that the EU is trying to pass laws to erode privacy indicate that there is privacy to erode? The US doesn't need to pass such laws because there are no protections.

> The US doesn't need to pass such laws because there are no protections. The US desperately needs fundamental definitions and protections in regard to privacy, but the fact that it is extremely common for European countries to prosecute illegal speech and associations is a big difference. Americans are trying to defend themselves against the secondary effects of surveillance. Europeans can just jail you for saying m…

EU has stronger protections against large private entities. Some people care more about that than they do about government (FWIW I think those people are wrong and the end result is the same, but it's a complicated subject).

Re: EU Council forces Chat Control via fast-track

#198

Post by int_19h »

pessimizer wrote: post #139
stavros wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't the mere fact that the EU is trying to pass laws to erode privacy indicate that there is privacy to erode? The US doesn't need to pass such laws because there are no protections.

> The US doesn't need to pass such laws because there are no protections. The US desperately needs fundamental definitions and protections in regard to privacy, but the fact that it is extremely common for European countries to prosecute illegal speech and associations is a big difference. Americans are trying to defend themselves against the secondary effects of surveillance. Europeans can just jail you for saying m…

> Also, as of a day or two ago, Europeans can be prosecuted for sharing any RT (Russia Today) content, even in private, regardless of content.

If you mean the July, 2 ruling of EU CoJ, I don't see anything there about "even in private". What they said is that if you have a website and put RT videos on it, it's "broadcasting" regardless of whether the website is freely accessible and/or run by a non-profit. Which sounds reasonable to me. The original ban on RT is still silly but that's a separate story.

Re: EU Council forces Chat Control via fast-track

#199

Post by jeroenhd »

hdgvhicv wrote: post #143

EU council is 27 individual governments each elected by their members. It’s like the US senate pre 17th ammendemnt.

Sort of, if the EU were a country. But the council doesn't consist of separate senators to determine the weight of the vote. And there's also the Commission and Parliament, which are closer to the American government structure as it stands now. The three bodies have different procedures or different decisions and law making processes.

But generally, the council represents the governments currently ruling the EU member states. A council of member states pushing for laws the comission opposes makes for a very interesting but confusing situation, where the EU is opposed to this legislation but the individual member states are not.

Re: EU Council forces Chat Control via fast-track

#200

Post by JensRantil »

neobrain wrote: post #49

For context, this refers to "Chat Control 1.0", allowing facebook and other messaging providers to scan chats for harmful content (which they had been temporarily allowed to do by a recently expired law). This is still problematic, but the far more dangerous Chat Control 2.0 that would weaken end-to-end-encrypted messengers like Signal is not being discussed here. Not to diminish the gravity of the new development, b…

Thanks for clarifying this!
Post reply on HN