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

Fight Chat Control

fightchatcontrol.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 528 posts

Re: Fight Chat Control

#291

Post by pabs3 »

api wrote: post #105
echelon wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While we're talking about corrupt politicians, why is this all happening all at once? America, Great Britain, and the EU are all creating tracking, monitoring, and censorship regulations. All at the same time. We're turning the internet into the 1984 inevitability it was predicted to become. We need a Bill of Rights against this. But the public is too lay to push for this. Bolstering or eroding privacy rights will ne…

For over a decade now there’s been a huge global shift toward authoritarianism, and to some extent it’s grassroots. My speculation is that this is a time of unprecedented change and that scares people. We also have aging populations due to lower birth rates and older people tend (on average) toward nostalgic reactionary politics.

At least two decades now, here I remember people talking back then about newly introduced CCTV cameras, and making maps of them so people could avoid the surveillance.

Re: Fight Chat Control

#292

Post by marcus_holmes »

Aerroon wrote: post #173
echelon wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While we're talking about corrupt politicians, why is this all happening all at once? America, Great Britain, and the EU are all creating tracking, monitoring, and censorship regulations. All at the same time. We're turning the internet into the 1984 inevitability it was predicted to become. We need a Bill of Rights against this. But the public is too lay to push for this. Bolstering or eroding privacy rights will ne…

I think the UK (and EU) have been at this for a while. The UK pushed for the Data Retention Directive in the EU in the mid 2000s that required ISPs to save all the websites you visit. This was eventually ruled to be illegal, but it was still in force for several years. These guys have been at it for a while. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Retention_Directive

Australia too. They've been playing with this for decades. The latest push is similar to the UK: age verification for porn and social media, but watch it expand once introduced.

The Establishment really don't like how they're not in control of what everyone hears or sees any more. It used to be so cozy for them.

Re: Fight Chat Control

#293

Post by rkomorn »

stephen_g wrote: post #240
rkomorn wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea isn't to break encryption, it's to have apps implement client-side scanning "pre-encryption".

Yes, what is proposed is breaking the end-to-end security model , not breaking the encryption itself. Effectively it causes the same loss of security and trust as if they broke the encryption, but it allows them the fig-leaf of pretending that you're still secure because they "haven't broken the encryption".

I like your wording.

I wasn't expressing an opinion in that comment but I do find the whole concept terrible.

Re: Fight Chat Control

#294

Post by Aeolun »

throwaway89201 wrote: post #126

Please also fight mandatory age verification with prison sentences. The European Parliament has already voted in favor of a law that mandates age verification for pornography with a one year prison sentence. It was included as a last minute amendment into this bill [1]. See "Amendment 186". It has been completely missed by news organizations and even interest groups. The full accepted article reads: "Disseminating po…

The standard for robust and effective age verification is extremely low, given how I’ve seen anyone do age verification. It’s also pointless if we’re talking about the internet, you are essentially outsourcing your porn production to foreign countries

Re: Fight Chat Control

#295

Post by Krssst »

fc417fc802 wrote: post #288
Krssst wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Covid authoritarian policies were hugely successful and supported by mainstream people by and large. They were temporary and saved lives. Keyword here is temporary. Of course COVID denialists are angry at it but they won in the USA now so we'll be happy getting more deaths and disabilities now that they are removing our ability to vaccinate ourselves.

Being temporary and being authoritarian are entirely orthogonal. In general I would imagine that cultures willing to accept temporary authoritarianism for the "right reasons" are more prone to falling to dictators.

Most democraties have provisions for times of exceptional needs and counterpowers against that. Of course that's a weakness but a weakness that's judged better than mass deaths or complete fall of the country.

Those have to be limited in time and regularly subjected to control by democratically-elected institutions (actually vote to see if extended or not).

Re: Fight Chat Control

#296

Post by Aeolun »

ngruhn wrote: post #261
steve_taylor wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I personally support age verification for porn. However, age verification for almost anything else, e.g. Reddit, is a terrible idea.

Idk age restricting Instagram, TikTok etc. might be good for teenagers mental health.

It’d be good for all mental health. Banning the whole thing is probably a lot more sensible, but then people would have to face their own addictions.

Re: Fight Chat Control

#297

Post by jack1243star »

ukprogrammer wrote: post #284
Nemo_bis wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you suggest an alternative action?

Decentralised messaging providers Can't enforce everyone to scan What are you going to do? Arrest everyone?

> What are you going to do? Arrest everyone?

Just like in any other authoritarian state, you make examples. People will quickly learn how to self-police (and to turn enemies in).

Re: Fight Chat Control

#299

Post by Aeolun »

r33b33 wrote: post #106
Centigonal wrote: post #25

In the US, we have government programs like PRISM and unchecked oligopolies that surveil us and use that information to identify dissent, sell us ads, and alter our behavior. In the EU, there are these initiatives to surveil us in the name of safety. Is there any regime out there who's not trying to mass-surveil their citizens for one reason or another?

yeah, Japan

They don’t really need to surveil their citizens. The indoctrination starts from kindergarden :)

Re: Fight Chat Control

#300

Post by rkomorn »

H8crilA wrote: post #232
rkomorn wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like it's "the maximum penalty must be at least 1 year", as in "your member state can't enact a law where the maximum penalty is less than 1 year". At least that's how I read it, but it's confusing.

This is correct. But the larger point is that even 1 minute of jail time for such "crimes" is unacceptable.

This is correct. But the larger point is that even though you can put pineapple on a pizza, you still shouldn't.
Post reply on HN