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

Post by stdclass » Fri, Nov 28, 2025, 4:21 PM UTC

raverbashing wrote: post #19

AndrewSwift wrote: post #3

It would be nice to have details: It rewards or penalizes online services depending on whether they agree to carry out “voluntary” scanning, effectively making intrusive monitoring a business expectation rather than a legal requirement.

Exactly this But people like to sensationalize stuff This is less worse than the original proposal Oh and honestly game chat rooms should not be private. (of course personal 1:1 messages should)

Post by abroszka33 » Fri, Nov 28, 2025, 4:21 PM UTC

pb7 wrote: post #246

jounker wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a US citizen, I have to say that you are completely mistaken. The US is a privacy hellscape.

Last I checked the US isn't trying to force legal backdoors into encryption which puts it firmly above the EU. Source: US citizen which gives me special knowledge

Post by permo-w » Fri, Nov 28, 2025, 4:23 PM UTC

voidfunc wrote: post #285

sillyfluke wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is 1814 we're talking about, right? That's only a decade after Louisiana Purchase just for reference and before the Mexican-American war. I guess we might as well give all that back to the Mexicans? You can play this game to the end of time. There's a reason for statute of limitations in law.

I mean if Mexico wants to come up here and invade us to take it back they can try, but it's not going to end well for them.

Post by permo-w » Fri, Nov 28, 2025, 4:28 PM UTC

petcat wrote: post #104

scotty79 wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Time is a factor. Taking land is what was done in the past. US wanting to do it now is as if Mexico decided to revive slavery and threatend to capture Afroamericans in USA. It's a touchy subject and I think most of US wouldn't be exactly on board with this idea. Especially since putin shows us exactly what happens if you try.

> Mexico decided to revive slavery and threatend to capture Afroamericans in USA It's a bad example because the power balance doesn't make sense. I think you will have a hard time coming up with any example where USA would be on the receiving end of something like this.

Post by vidarh » Fri, Nov 28, 2025, 4:35 PM UTC

genericacct wrote: post #149

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.

TFA mentions "european governments" but this legislation is proposed by a bunch of european members of parliament who in no way represent any governments and much less the commission or the union. In short it tries to depict a group of old farts as an overreaching snooping authority. I wonder who could have a vested interest in depicting the EU as a repressive regime...