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

301–310 of 449 posts

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

#301

Post by latexr »

npodbielski wrote: post #290
latexr wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the second paragraph in your link: > While some 19th-century experiments suggested that the underlying premise is true if the heating is sufficiently gradual, according to modern biologists the premise is false: changing location is a natural thermoregulation strategy for frogs and other ectotherms, and is necessary for survival in the wild. A frog that is gradually heated will jump out. Furthermore, a frog plac…

It is just a saying my dear friend. I added link because I was not sure how known it is in other countries - if at all. But of course some HN commenter had to do: 'well actually...'. :D If I would write something like: 'Better late than never' would you be correcting me too? 'Well actually studies shows that it is better never...' I recommend some chilling with a nice cup of tea.

I genuinely didn’t mean to upset you, and apologise for that. I enjoy learning about idioms and their origins, and find it doubly interesting when something is widespread but based on an incorrect notion. My comment was made in good faith, it was in no way intended as a slight on you.

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

#302

Post by gregbot »

Fnoord wrote: post #271
raxxorraxor wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And while all this is happening, there are cases were peoples homes get search for comments on twitter. These are often in bad taste, but what tastes even worse is that the judiciary doesn't seem to understand proportionality anymore. Mean tweets carry higher sentences than raping someone, stern look at Germany here. A judiciary in such a sorry state, that has not adapted to a changed reality, cannot be permitted to…

'Mean tweets' is such an empty meaning. Come with examples. It is on paper very easy to break the law via speech. If I post something here about how I want to reward a murder on a certain politician (or want to do it myself), I can guarantee you the police would be involved. And rightfully so. Freedom of speech is about pre-moderation. It doesn't mean your actions do not have consequences. If you yell fire in a theat…

>doesn't mean your actions do not have consequences

YES IT DOES THAT IS EXACTLY THE POINT

You obviously do not believe in freedom of speech as defined by US law. You are conflating extremely narrow exceptions with broad politically motivated violations of freedom of political speech

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

#303

Post by squigz »

DangitBobby wrote: post #216
squigz wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People on average are really not that stupid and are absolutely capable of looking back a few years for context.

We clearly live in different worlds.

Maybe that says more about your biases than it does about the intelligence of 8 billion people though.

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

#304

Post by squigz »

LexiMax wrote: post #228
squigz wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Awareness of the reality, yes, but there's no reason to play people's emotions to get them "aware" of it - or in other words, get them angry about it.

While I disagree with your position for the reasons already given by others, it's quite ironic that in this thread about government censorship that your opinion is in the process of being censored by other HN users.

Being downvoted is not remotely "censorship"

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

#306

Post by Workaccount2 »

IlikeKitties wrote: post #40
snvzz wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Business, eh. Maybe it's time to go open source and fully distributed peer-to-peer. Something like Tox[0] or SimpleX[1]. The (actual) solution should be to fix legislation to adequate protect privacy, because they'll attack this next. But meantime, a technical solution is better than nothing. 0. https://tox.chat/ 1. https://simplex.chat/

> Hi Mom, please install this peer to peer dark net chat to talk to me in the future, thanks Oh honey, why don't we just use iMessage instead. Thx bye.

Whet nerds perpetually don't understand, is that regular people hate the apps that nerds love, which are largely apps made by nerds who hate the apps that normal people love.

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

#307

Post by permo-w »

andersa wrote: post #126
VWWHFSfQ wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> restrict their first amendment rights how is this relevant in the UK

A better question is how is whatever the UK is doing relevant for 4chan, which is an American company with no presence in the UK.

because 4chan's services are available to people residing in the UK

the OSA is ridiculous and I hope it goes the same way as the last time they tried it, but this idea that US companies should be immune to domestic regulation in countries their services are available to is silly. even if that domestic regulation is silly. because otherwise the utterly encaptured regulatory environment of the US (plus Visa and MC) solely dictates the internet

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

#308

Post by TazeTSchnitzel »

Account_Removed wrote: post #279
piker wrote: post #6

Even living nearby in the UK it blows my mind how quickly the EU proposes, kills and then revives and passes controversial legislation in such a short timeframe.

"European Council has no legislative power, it is a strategic (and crisis-solving) body that provides the union with general political directions and priorities, and acts as a collective presidency." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Council

Wrong Council, this is about the Council of the European Union (yes the naming is terrible).

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

#309

Post by zx10rse »

ben_w wrote: post #205
Xelbair wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This type of legislation should never ever be proposed in a democratic system, so had disagree. This is an extremely totalitarian-style move from EU - governing bodies are exempt from the law, meanwhile peasants have to be watched 24/7 for wrongthink, all under guise of protecting the children.

While I agree with the sentiment, you need to think like a state to stop this kind of thing. Even without any argument about personal rights and what's totalitarian, I can't even square the circle of the unstoppable force of "the economy is dependent on encryption that can't be hacked" with the immovable object of "hostile governments and organised criminals undermine ${insert any nation here} and communicate with lo…

I keep seeing this fallacy argument about some bad actors and criminals etc. etc. Every government have structures and laws to prevent such activities, in absolutely no shape or form it does not need to read every single message of it citizens. I don't understand how someone can be apologetic for totalitarian state.

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

#310

Post by pixelpoet »

graemep wrote: post #140
Traubenfuchs wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK keeps a register of non-crime hate incidents and invests its scarce police resources into harassing, arresting and punishing people for twitter posts.

That might well change: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0kn54vj55xo.amp

Non-AMP link to help keep dirty monopolists at bay: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0kn54vj55xo

Please don't use AMP.

Post reply on HN