Live data from Hacker News

The EU still wants to scan your private messages and photos

fightchatcontrol.eu

261–270 of 432 posts

Re: The EU still wants to scan your private messages and photos

#261
post #3

Framing this as the EU's attempt is antieuropean propaganda. It is the Conservatives attempt. The EU parliament is the entity that shot it down last time.

Fight Chat Control is a website maintained by a European. It is no more anti-European than I, an American, speaking about the latest antics of our conservative-led government and saying, "The US government is attempting to ____".

If you’re against the EU you’re with Hungary and if you’re with Hungary, you’re with Orban and Putin: an enemy of democracy

Re: The EU still wants to scan your private messages and photos

#263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any "right" that is not absolute is a worthless fairy tale. Compromise is the root of all evil.

So you’re saying there can be no worthwhile privacy protections as long as subpoenas and search warrants exist and it’s physically possible for someone to eavesdrop? I guess we might as well switch everything back to http.

The only worthwhile protections are those provided by mathematics. If you encrypt a message, then you can be sure not even god will read it. When a government gives you "protections" you can be sure of nothing.

Re: The EU still wants to scan your private messages and photos

#264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Sounds like russian troll talking point.

I don't think dismissing anyone as an agitproppist or foreign agent who expresses a dim view of the EU's tendency toward overreach and habit of asking the same question over and over until it's answered "correctly" is fair. Not when McCarthy did it, and not today. And I can promise you that nobody's paying me to post online, anyway!

Re: The EU still wants to scan your private messages and photos

#265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Freedom of speech is not a European value.

Based on what? https://rsf.org/en/index https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/freedom-of-expression-ind... I would be more worried about police and wannabe police shooting people on the streets, detaining citizens without due process, sending billions to war in Iran while regular people are struggling with day-to-day life. Your universities and primary schools are restricted what they can teach or say either by governme…

I was reading an essay by Kant called “what is Enlightenment?” It argues that people should be permitted to say whatever they wanted, provided they obey the laws.

He bases it on the idea that we should not be subject to be “lifelong tuteledge.” At some point we must speak up and contribute.

We can be wrong. Very wrong. We can advise our rulers to do terrible things. The Holocaust hadn’t happened yet, but the Wars of Relgion had - he knew how bad people could be.

Europe doesn’t seem to reject lifelong tuteledge any more. There want opinion and thought to be guided and formed by an elite class, not a noisy crowd of peers.

This is new. It was foreign to Kant, foreign to Locke, Hobbes, Marx, etc.

It’s a bit scary the Europe is leading the way on this. And it does seem they are poking at speech specifically.

Most recently the EU is considering a “ban conversion therapy.” Not medical malpractice legislation - just a very specific type of medical malpractice that has a very specific political constituency.

Meanwhile people who are subject to quacky things like past life regression or Freudian analysis are left with the normal malpractice system.

Really Europe (and other places) are using it as a way to weaken freedom of speech.

Maybe I’m connecting dots where there are none, but there seems to be a big international shift away from free speech, with Europe taking the lead.

In America this manifests itself as “it would be nice if we could restrict speech like normal countries do, but we have to worry about the Republicans, so let’s not do that - yet.”

But it’s pretty clear free speech is going the way of right to bear arms and trial by jury.

Re: The EU still wants to scan your private messages and photos

#266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Commission consists of the Member States. So obviously they are also voted-in parties since the government of the Member States is democratically elected

True but it's a step removed. The MEPs are directly voted in whilst the EC are not, they're "voted in" on account of "voted in" people assigning them to the EC. I mean nobody argues that the FED governor is voted in, right? In reality a lot of people argue that they're unelected and yet making decisions that affect everyone.

This in standard in europe. Most places don't vote for their PM or President either, they're just the leader of the largest party in parliament and chosen by parliament

Re: The EU still wants to scan your private messages and photos

#267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder what it would take to expel them from the EU...

It's simply not possible. EU law has no provisions for kicking a malignant country out. It was simply not foreseen. They can only decide to leave themselves. Which orban will never do because his oligarchs make billions off EU subsidies. If it were it would have happened already.

Order is on the verge of breakdown I wouldn't be surprised if they just lose their voice/get kicked out.

Trump etc are tearing down international order. The ramifications of this will be decades long.

Re: The EU still wants to scan your private messages and photos

#268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we can barely stop new legislation we don't like, let alone pass new ones we do These are literally the same process.

Is it? Stopping is a matter of ground swell support contacting representatives and saying "please don't". Enough people do it to enough receptive reps and they'll vote no. Passing new ones that "you like" requires lawyers to write laws, get those laws in front of reps, get them to agree to try and pass it, stake some of their reputation on pushing it, get the ground swell to support it -- which might be difficult whe…

Stopping legislation means organizing a sufficient number of no votes.

Passing it means organizing a sufficient number of yes votes.

They are the same process and they require exactly the same work. They take place at the exact same moment in time and space, although they are mutually exclusive.

You're free to describe things however you want, but your descriptions won't change the underlying reality.

Re: The EU still wants to scan your private messages and photos

#269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder what it would take to expel them from the EU...

It's simply not possible. EU law has no provisions for kicking a malignant country out. It was simply not foreseen. They can only decide to leave themselves. Which orban will never do because his oligarchs make billions off EU subsidies. If it were it would have happened already.

They cannot make them leave the EU, no. But Hungary can be:

- kicked out of the Schengen Treaty

- kicked out of the NATO

- fined under EU breach of contract proceedings

- withheld financial support as long as they do not pay these fines

- forced through customs policy, which is sole EU competence, to stop compensating lost EU support with Chinese money

Honestly, I'd be in full support of some above listed actions if the elections in April show the current will of the Hungarian people misaligned with shared EU values.

Re: The EU still wants to scan your private messages and photos

#270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Secrecy of correspondence still has exceptions. That's what is always lost in these discussions -- every right of every person is not absolute. Just because you have a right to personal property, doesn't mean you don't have to pay taxes or store nuclear material in your basement. That's the hard part. But end to end encryption with forward secrecy at no cost to user makes your right to private communication absolute…

> But end to end encryption with forward secrecy at no cost to user makes your right to private communication absolute As it should be. Governments should have to suck it up. If they want to know things about someone, they should have to actually assign police to follow them around. Not click a button and have the lives of everyone in the entire world revealed to them.

>Governments should have to suck it up. If they want to know things about someone, they should have to actually assign police to follow them around.

What you describe is clearly not the only possible policy choice.

The opposite doom scenario isn't either.

Based on the past experience, government gonna do their government stuff

Post reply on HN