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

EU Council Approves New "Chat Control" Mandate Pushing Mass Surveillance

reclaimthenet.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 449 posts

Re: EU Council Approves New "Chat Control" Mandate Pushing Mass Surveillance

#291

Post by npodbielski »

rdm_blackhole wrote: post #263
npodbielski wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Signal is centralized. So this company operating in EU, under EU laws, will have to do the scanning too. How they implement it however and when and if at all remains to be seen. All maybe they will not and EU will block signal. Maybe they will allow you install apk and Google will block installing from apks directly, basically forcing companies to do the scanning. And if everybody will do the scanning, maybe they wil…

> Signal is centralized. So this company operating in EU, under EU laws, will have to do the scanning too. The Signal CEO has repeated that they will rather leave the EU than start doing the scanning.

We will see...

Re: EU Council Approves New "Chat Control" Mandate Pushing Mass Surveillance

#292

Post by surgical_fire »

lenkite wrote: post #160
surgical_fire wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Identical in every respect other than those with the power to initiate legislation are completely immune to voter displeasure. You are aware that those with power to initiate legislation are appointed by national governments right? If you are unhappy with how your country posed itself in those propositions, you can and should vote for parties that have different stances.

How do the people kick out a EU representative ? Without the power to do so, it is not a "democracy".

There are elections for the EU parliament.

As for council or commission, I presume you can elect different national governments from time to time? I mean, unless you are in Hungary.

Re: EU Council Approves New "Chat Control" Mandate Pushing Mass Surveillance

#293

Post by rdm_blackhole »

raverbashing wrote: post #268
jeroenhd wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This achieves every goal the original proposal achieved, except the wording is sneakier. Services are obligated to do risk analysis and take appropriate safety precautions against high risk actions. High risk actions include "anonymous accounts", "uploading media", and of course "encrypted messages". The moment they catch the next random pedo, every messenger app on their phone will be tasked with explaining why they…

You're reading too much into this Technical gotchas are not the same as legal gotchas

> You're reading too much into this

OP is not reading too much into this. You are being naive if you think that this is not the intended goal of this law.

Everyone who has looked at this proposal know that the 'changes" made to the latest draft are not real changes and that voluntary scanning with repercussions is the same exact thing as mandatory.

If a robber walks into your house and ask you to give all your cash and threatens to break your legs if you don't do it, did you give your money voluntarily or was it forced by the threat of violence?

Either something is mandatory and if not done, should be punished accordingly or something is voluntary in which case, then if someone does not do it there are no repercussions.

You can't say that something is voluntary and but that there would be repercussions if that thing is not done. It does not make sense.

Yet that is exactly what this law says. High risk companies should prevent the spread of CSAM but they are not forced to do it, except that if they don't do it then bad things will happen to them but don't worry it's not mandatory.

Those are just weasel words by politicians. Nothing more.

Re: EU Council Approves New "Chat Control" Mandate Pushing Mass Surveillance

#294

Post by surgical_fire »

hn_throw2025 wrote: post #134
surgical_fire wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Identical in every respect other than those with the power to initiate legislation are completely immune to voter displeasure. You are aware that those with power to initiate legislation are appointed by national governments right? If you are unhappy with how your country posed itself in those propositions, you can and should vote for parties that have different stances.

Your link to the Commission and Council is homeopathic democracy, right? In the UK with a Parliamentary democracy, unpopular policy ideas can be abandoned. Manifestos are not always adhered to, but they typically include ideas that their canvassers can sell on the doorstep and there is robust media criticism when they abandon their promises. We have a strong history of U turns because our politicians are wary of unpo…

You speak as if the Commission and Council are somehow divorced from ne national governments of the member states.

Those are not Lovecraftian entities that came from undersea. Their members are appointed from the national governments. If you dislike how your country position itself on those organs, this should change your view on how the ruling parties in your country took decisions at the EU level.

Re: EU Council Approves New "Chat Control" Mandate Pushing Mass Surveillance

#295

Post by Frieren »

rdm_blackhole wrote: post #253

I am a fairly apolitical guy but in light of this I will cast my next votes for the parties that want to leave the EU from now on. Yes, I know Brexit was a failure and the UK is no better in terms of privacy but there has to be some sort sort of political repercussion for the people who made this possible. Since there seems to be nothing else to do, then voting to leave is better than the status quo.

> I am a fairly apolitical guy but in light of this I will cast my next votes for the parties that want to leave the EU from now on.

You say that you are apolitical, but you sound like an extremist. What should I believe, what you say you are or what you actually do?

Re: EU Council Approves New "Chat Control" Mandate Pushing Mass Surveillance

#296

Post by rdm_blackhole »

npodbielski wrote: post #291
rdm_blackhole wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Signal is centralized. So this company operating in EU, under EU laws, will have to do the scanning too. The Signal CEO has repeated that they will rather leave the EU than start doing the scanning.

We will see...

Yeah, I agree. We will see what happens.

Words are just words as far as I know but the prospect of leaving the EU for Signal would really send a strong message to all those who still believe that the EU is better in terms of privacy than the US.

As far as I am concerned this is the nail in the coffin for the EU privacy advocates/ evangelists.

Re: EU Council Approves New "Chat Control" Mandate Pushing Mass Surveillance

#298

Post by flawn »

GuB-42 wrote: post #86
sph wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Palantir and Thorn lobbyists So, US interests? Which means the NSA?

No need to look that far. Palantir sells software for analyzing data, like Excel but on a large scale. If "Chat Control" passes, they will need software to analyze the data they collect, which is exactly what Palantir sells. It is just business. I don't know about Thorn but it looks like the same: they sell software that may be of use for implementing "Chat Control".

"It is a just a business" is crazy to say if your founder was Peter Thiel and you ostensibly merged already halfway with the operating goverment (US, DoD)

Re: EU Council Approves New "Chat Control" Mandate Pushing Mass Surveillance

#299

Post by okokwhatever »

sneak wrote: post #237
pessimizer wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've always advocated a proliferation of overlapping "states." Let them keep each other in check. Instead of having a tree with a king at the top and your local police station at the bottom, be a part of the governance for the river that you live near, for the city that surrounds you, for the grocery store in your neighborhood, for your local fire department, and let all of them have codified relationships with each…

So, the problem with all of these proposed replacement systems (such as IRV, for example) is that "democracy" is a meme. People, en masse, believe in these systems-as-written (for better or worse) - critically - even if that isn't how things actually work on the ground in the real world. So many people believe that, for example, the stuff written on the paper currency of the United States is legally binding. (It's ir…

Because democracy IS a meme

Re: EU Council Approves New "Chat Control" Mandate Pushing Mass Surveillance

#300

Post by epolanski »

spencerflem wrote: post #288
GuB-42 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No need to look that far. Palantir sells software for analyzing data, like Excel but on a large scale. If "Chat Control" passes, they will need software to analyze the data they collect, which is exactly what Palantir sells. It is just business. I don't know about Thorn but it looks like the same: they sell software that may be of use for implementing "Chat Control".

Thiel also has a religious angle, where he thinks himself a god and imagines a perfect society where every human is watched at all times

Will that constant monitoring include him? Because these billionaires get ultra touchy even if you track their private jets.
Post reply on HN