221–230 of 323 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
As a Russian whose parents actually remember the USSR, I'm genuinely horrified by the Brezhnev vibes the EU's giving off.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not undemocratic. The behavior of the parliament reflects the reality that only a tiny minority of the population care at all about this issue. One might be tempted to blame a lack of media attention, but I don't think that's it. For example in the US, the Snowden revelations attracted tons and tons of media attention, yet it never became a major topic in elections, as far as I'm aware. No politician's career wa…
Parliamentary democracy just fundamentally has a weakness when it comes to single-issue voting. After picking a party to vote on based on housing, economic policy, crime, ..., how much voting power so to say is left for.. which guy the party says they'll send to the european commission? And what that guy's stance on chat-control is? If they're even publicizing that...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Parliamentary democracy just fundamentally has a weakness when it comes to single-issue voting. After picking a party to vote on based on housing, economic policy, crime, ..., how much voting power so to say is left for.. which guy the party says they'll send to the european commission? And what that guy's stance on chat-control is? If they're even publicizing that...
Not to mention that once voted in they are not bound by their campaign promises.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Phrasing the question is half the battle. "Do you want to be spied on by your government?" Yes is yes, no is no, anything more comes from evil.
Yes, that's exactly my point - it's important to understand the issue and the messaging about it. Government "spies" on you for many many things and I think HN "all government is evil" panic isn't really reflected in outlook of EU citizens and won't be looked upon positively by public at large. So again, be careful what you're calling "undemocratic" because that's not the same as "different from my opinion".
I'm generally against all reactionist legislation as an instance "no" stance as well.
One interesting line in the proposal: > Detection will not apply to accounts used by the State for national security purposes, maintaining law and order or military purposes; If it's all very safe and accurate, why is this exception necessary? Doesn't this say either that it's not secure, or that there is a likely hood that there will be false positives that will be reviewed? If they have it all figured out, this exc…
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Privacy of communications is usually a normal law not constitutional principle, so slots perfectly fine without any supremacy issues between constitution and EU law.
It is indeed a constitutional principle in many EU countries. It is also part of the Treaty of Lisbon via the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, which is the closest thing to a constitutional level law for the EU. Not that this has ever stopped anybody.
Because that would technically make any present day wiretap illegal too.
So the detail is written in normal law tract...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's not hard to imagine what they'll try to do, and chat-control will make it easier for them. Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) is against Chat Control. https://fightchatcontrol.eu/#delegates
Most probably because they are not in power or leading the coalition at the moment. Similar positions were held by the once similar parties in Italy before they rose to prominence, and from once bigger parties trying to not vanquish. Power consolidation is a shared trait of every leading individual or group of people.