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

EU to greenlight Chat Control tomorrow

patrick-breyer.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 360 posts

Re: EU to greenlight Chat Control tomorrow

#241

Post by 7373737373 »

nikolay wrote: post #182

I think the government is more reasonable than the private corporations. As an example, I got suspended by Facebook yesterday with nobody to contact. All my friends from school, relatives, and former coworkers are gone - with most of them I was connected only via Facebook. All my messages in Facebook Messenger groups have been deleted! Everything that I ever posted, shared, or reacted to - gone! With no recourse - al…

It's time for humanity to move on, to social/messaging platforms not controlled by (for-profit) entities. Or ideally by themselves. Have you seen https://lurk-lang.org? Now it's even possible for anyone to provably compute a specific algorithm on your encrypted data!

Re: EU to greenlight Chat Control tomorrow

#242

Post by tonynator »

squigz wrote: post #220
tonynator wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. The free market would solve the first two, the next two aren't even crimes currently, and with the last the crime is the violence/vandalism not someone telling a fib.

Firstly, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation Secondly, you're okay with someone inciting violence/vandalism/crimes, and people acting explicitly on that person's direction, as long as only the actual violence/vandalism/crime is punished?

Defamation shouldn't exist (see Alex Jones, that's an insane situation to be told to pay $1.5 BILLION for sharing an opinion) but the standards are generally higher than "someone told lies about my character" at least.

Yes. Everyone has agency, if I tell you to commit a crime it's up to you whether to do so.

Re: EU to greenlight Chat Control tomorrow

#243

Post by lomase »

dauertewigkeit wrote: post #108
consumer451 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not directing this at you, or anyone here, truly. However, this XKCD always come to mind whenever I hear the topics of hate speech and free speech mentioned within proximity of each other: https://xkcd.com/1357/

I have an example in mind, a very recent one, in which case it was indeed the government abusing hate speech laws to silence critics. Ask Greta Thunberg.

Ask Greta Thunberg? The level is very low here. This kind of comments are not what I come to HN.

Re: EU to greenlight Chat Control tomorrow

#244

Post by chucke1992 »

Wytwwww wrote: post #48
FredPret wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We learnt the value of free speech the hard way, and very slowly. Now we need to keep extending such notions to the rapidly increasing frontiers that new tech is exposing. Hopefully with more tech-savvy generations gradually taking power, this will happen without too many painful lessons.

> We learnt the value of free speech the hard way, and very slowly Did we though? Unfortunately outside the US and a handful of other places free speech doesn't seem to be valued that much, often it's even viewed as a threat (and I'm not talking about authoritarian regimes). It's a double-edged sword to be fair, enabling misinformation and chaos.

The solution to free speech - just like with democracy - is the education but that's not going to happen as too many actors want the power.

Re: EU to greenlight Chat Control tomorrow

#245

Post by londons_explore »

diego_sandoval wrote: post #80
kelnos wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think that Zuckerberg is one of the few big tech CEOs that still has principles "Still"? I'm not aware of a time when he's publicly shown any sort of principles.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-36187028 Google or Microsoft would just give up data of their users at the first request to avoid a ban. Sure, Meta can't * do it because of E2E, but that alone is much better than what Google does. * without pushing a malicious update.

> * without pushing a malicious update.

And I believe that is exactly what the court was demanding they do. Push an update to uncloak the users that the court determines should lose their privacy.

Re: EU to greenlight Chat Control tomorrow

#246

Post by anonzzzies »

gpvos wrote: post #89
throwawayfear wrote: post #78

EU continues its descent into an authoritarian surveillance state. I hope all the EU netizens wake up and realize how much more control the EU has been exerting over its citizens since the pandemic.

It hasn't, apart from this Chat Control.

Which even hasn’t happened yet, but yes, bit too close for comfort.

Re: EU to greenlight Chat Control tomorrow

#247

Post by WhyNotHugo »

matricaria wrote: post #23
lxgr wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Meeting with Google and Microsoft lobbyists at the best Brussels luxury restaurants. Are you talking about the same EU that just passed the DMA? That must have been some really nasty food poisoning then!

Are they even enforcing DMA? My WhatsApp still doesn’t have Third Party Chats.

I wouldn't expect it to any time soon either. They'll likely find a way to maliciously comply.

My bet is that they'll only allow "Trusted Partners" to interact with their network, and you'll need to sign a contract with one of these partners to connect to WhatsApp. This contract will have pretty much the same terms as signing up with Meta directly.

Re: EU to greenlight Chat Control tomorrow

#248

Post by zx10rse »

gpvos wrote: post #225
throwawayfear wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Covid restrictions were significantly worse in the EU than USA, your government locked you all down and made it clear that they decide who works and who doesn’t. To be clear, the USA has some awful cities with those types of ideas too but it was far more rare. EU, Canada, and Australia showed they are teetering towards authoritarian surveillance states more than they are democracy. The more people put their head in t…

You're entitled to your opinion, but I think those were basic public health measures, fully justified. They ended when no longer needed.

Next time you want to stay home destroy economics and life of millions of people please don't drag us with you -[1] "lockdowns have had little to no effect on COVID-19 mortality"

"The price tag of lockdowns in terms of public health is high: by using the known connection between health and wealth, we estimate that lockdowns may claim 20 times more life years than they save."

"Numerous deaths can be attributed to the interruption of normal social life and routine regular social interactions. The direct factors are [25,26]:

increased mortality due to postponement of diagnoses and routine treatments increase in mortality due to non-arrival at hospitals increase in mortality due to a decrease in the level of income and as a result—use of less safe cars, reduction in the scope of physical activity, etc. “deaths of despair” caused by drugs, alcohol, and suicide following loss of social-economic status increase in violence, including domestic violence; dismantling of families severe health damage to the elderly in particular—physical and mental deterioration (usually irreversible) due to loneliness, lack of movement, and routine supportive care."

[1] - Are Lockdowns Effective in Managing Pandemics? - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9368251/#:~:tex....

Re: EU to greenlight Chat Control tomorrow

#249

Post by WhyNotHugo »

worldsayshi wrote: post #68

How is VPN supposed to work? How are internet banks supposed to operate? All security will go out the window? Backdoors everywhere? Will TLS have to be redone with a third snooping party in the mix? Is that what we're going for here?

The draft specifies (in page 3) that this is only for publicly accessible services: https://cdn.netzpolitik.org/wp-upload/2024/05/2024-05-28_Cou...

So regular folks would get scanned, but the bank's private messaging service isn't included. Just like the child pornographer's private messaging service won't be included either.

Re: EU to greenlight Chat Control tomorrow

#250

Post by adammarples »

immibis wrote: post #199
broken-kebab wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Free Speech as a political principle is about relations between a state, and citizens, not a website, and its users. There are some gray-zone cases (e.g. formally private press/platforms can be heavily influenced by a ruling party using economic means, or for whatever reason some press/platform conglomerate controls market share so big it can influence gov't to legislate conditions harmful to potential competition),…

So I could have no ability to say anything at all, and still have free speech?

Yes. To test this, close the website and go and shout out of your window.
Post reply on HN