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

The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

netzpolitik.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 443 posts

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#391

Post by em-bee »

easytiger wrote: post #368
estebank wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The infringements refer to the following: the video surveillance system covers public streets as well as parking lots, both part of the public area in front of the entrance of the sports betting café. This is not adequate for the purposes of the processing and is not limited to a necessary extent. There are no logs of video surveillance processing operations. There is no deletion of the personal image data recorded…

You set up a camera to cover your front garden and if you happen to cover a portion of the street leading up to your property you are breaking the law. That's genuinely absurd. Keep in mind these apply to residential systems also. The rest of your quote is just as ridiculous. > There are no logs of video surveillance processing operations. It's a private system, why should there be. > There is no deletion of the pers…

if you happen to cover a portion of the street leading up to your property you are breaking the law

in germany too.

why is that absurd?

you can monitor your own property, but don't record me when i am walking along the street please.

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#392

Post by em-bee »

ekianjo wrote: post #343
rostigerpudel wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those requests would neither have been possible nor come in by such numbers if Germans were not privacy-aware.

your house on the street is public landscape. privacy does not apply on what you see from the road.

without streetview or photos on a public website, only people who are actually passing by my house can see it.

otherwise it is visible to the whole world. that is a drastic difference for a privacy conscious person.

or consider for example me posting a picture of my house without giving any address. there is nothing identifying except the building. with streetview you could potentially find my address. why should you be able to do that?

sure, streetview is nice to use, but i think privacy concerns are real.

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#393

Post by jokethrowaway »

rpastuszak wrote: post #276
paganel wrote: post #222

As an EU citizen I didn't know exactly what that Chat Control thing was, so I web searched it: > The EU wants to oblige providers to search all private chats, messages, and emails automatically for suspicious content – generally and indiscriminately. The stated aim: To prosecute child pornography. [1] Yeah, that will go down well, a central government checking our private conversations for "suspicious content". Of co…

> F. that, the only viable solution I see for my country is an exit from the EU Genuine, not loaded question: and then what? What do you expect to happen?

It's easier to go to the capital of your country and bomb the parliament than go and do the same in Bruxelles. You can't expect foreign politicians who can't even spell your country correctly to care about your problems. You can keep your local politicians more accountable.

I personally think we should decentralise power even more: country level is still too much. EU level is just ridiculous.

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#394

Post by n4r9 »

rob_c wrote: post #377
n4r9 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good to know there's a name for this. It's pernicious. I came across it recently when someone said "if vaccines are effective then how come 60% of COVID patients in hospital have had one?".

No in this case there is an abuse of language which has led to the poisoning of the conversation somewhat. There, the reason being the broad change in the correct definition of the word "vaccine". In former years this would be a preventative treatment that was probably 90%+ effective for multiple years for most people for almost all symptoms and almost all ability for infection to spread. The key being stopping the s…

At the time, the "base rate" of vaccination was already up around 90%, so the 60% rate in hospitalised patients actually demonstrated significant protection.

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#395

Post by jokethrowaway »

monkeynotes wrote: post #376
pharmakom wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

UK government is working hard to replace all the worst aspects of the EU with homegrown alternatives.

Examples? And what about replacing all the good things the EU provided with homegrown initiatives?

What were the good things beside less hassles when travelling and some money thrown at universities? Genuine question.

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#396

Post by jokethrowaway »

donkeyd wrote: post #279
rpastuszak wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> F. that, the only viable solution I see for my country is an exit from the EU Genuine, not loaded question: and then what? What do you expect to happen?

Probably what Brexiteers expected to happen, that everything they don't like disappears and nothing gets worse.

The real reason Brexit happened is that people were concerned about the immigration of poor Europeans in the UK and the future prospects of having to bear a share of the poor Africans together with the rest of EU.

I was a poor European who moved to the UK and I've seen first hand the problems that immigration of poor people can cause on crime (from drunks to petty theft to stabbing) and how much the locals dislike it.

I've seen the same happening in Italy and the situation nowadays is so bad I would be genuinely scared to live next to the train station in any major city in Italy.

I think a model based on skills is the best approach: if you want to move in you should be able to prove you're skilled and that we need you. Once you pass the checkboxes the process should also be much smoother than what it is right now, the typical bureaucratic nightmare.

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#397

Post by dane-pgp »

vidarh wrote: post #381
dane-pgp wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It'll be trivial to work around for anyone actually up to no good I never claimed they were motivated to actually stop these crimes. If the real ultimate goal is to prevent the spreading of "state secrets" (i.e. journalists exposing government malfeasance), or reduce copyright infringement, or limiting the spread of "disinformation", or banning memes that insult public figures, then the government needn't worry abo…

If the goal is to create an authoritarian dictatorship, then sure, controlling "most people" is usually enough because you can control the press by sending thugs to their offices. But your "next step" is far beyond what even China does. It would kill off any ability for software development. I'm all for being vigilant, but these scenarios are not realistic. As for a general purpose computing device being useful, as l…

> But your "next step" is far beyond what even China does.

And yet online services blocking access to non-SecureBoot devices is already the norm for industries ranging from online gaming[0] to fast food![1]

Add in the fact that Hollywood wants this (for DRM and blocking torrenting apps) and governments like Australia claiming their laws trump the laws of mathematics[2], and you can almost guarantee that this is going to become mandated as soon as enough Windows 10 users update to Windows 11.

> It would kill off any ability for software development.

Software development would have to be sponsored by approved companies, or at the very least you'd need to apply to the government for a "licence to code", with your ID number baked into every app you create. As an interim step, governments may allow devices to access a "legacy" portion of the internet which doesn't require SecureBoot to be enabled, but expect that portion to get smaller and smaller each year.

> as long as you can send or receive text or sound or images in any format that can be intercepted, you can tunnel arbitrary data.

But which app are you going to use to create those sound or image files? I suppose you could create your "illegal" files on an airgapped non-approved device, and transfer them via USB to the approved device, and people could do the reverse process when they receive them, but that's a cat-and-mouse game which 99% of people can't or won't play, and governments will win by mandating cryptographic watermarks in any files created.

[0] https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2021/09/riot-games-anti-cheat...

[1] https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/mcdonalds-app-knows-im-...

[2] https://www.zdnet.com/article/the-laws-of-australia-will-tru...

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#398

Post by rob_c »

n4r9 wrote: post #394
rob_c wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No in this case there is an abuse of language which has led to the poisoning of the conversation somewhat. There, the reason being the broad change in the correct definition of the word "vaccine". In former years this would be a preventative treatment that was probably 90%+ effective for multiple years for most people for almost all symptoms and almost all ability for infection to spread. The key being stopping the s…

At the time, the "base rate" of vaccination was already up around 90%, so the 60% rate in hospitalised patients actually demonstrated significant protection.

Yes again in the art risk groups this reduced significant symptoms hence why they're underrepresented in global hospitalisation numbers. As I keep saying it's a fantastic preventative treatment.

Unfortunately many people are still catching it repeatedly, displaying symptoms repeatedly and the fact that despite 90%+ of people are immunised. With vaccination levels like this for various other diseases transmission would be pretty much stopped and symptoms would be much lower.

Anyway, not looking to derail, just want to point out there is a significant change in the definition of words being used which can causes conversations to become toxic, and apologies if you think I'm being abrupt.

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#399

Post by pharmakom »

monkeynotes wrote: post #376
pharmakom wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

UK government is working hard to replace all the worst aspects of the EU with homegrown alternatives.

Examples? And what about replacing all the good things the EU provided with homegrown initiatives?

So one example is pushing the surveillance and anti encryption agenda covered in this article.

Re: The EU Commission accepts high error rates when checking chats

#400

Post by jjav »

ekianjo wrote: post #343
rostigerpudel wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those requests would neither have been possible nor come in by such numbers if Germans were not privacy-aware.

your house on the street is public landscape. privacy does not apply on what you see from the road.

> your house on the street is public landscape. privacy does not apply on what you see from the road.

It would be difficult (impossible) for 8 billion people to come over to my street and stare at my house, in the physical world.

So it's very different to expose the view on the internet to all those 8 billion.

Post reply on HN