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

421–430 of 528 posts

Re: Fight Chat Control

#421

Post by cccbbbaaa »

sampo wrote: post #342
x775 wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ultimately, both the EU Council and the European Parliament must agree on legislation for it to pass. The Parliament acts as a co-legislator with equal legislative power in this process, effectively representing the citizens while the Council represents the member states governments. Both have to agree. In the case of Chat Control, Denmark, as the current EU Council Presidency, revived the proposal (after it previous…

> The Parliament acts as a co-legislator with equal legislative power in this process The EU Parliament doesn't have equal legislative power. EU Commission proposes legislation, and the parliament can only accept or reject. Of course informally they can discuss with the Commission and let the Commission know what they would or would not pass. > effectively representing the citizens while the Council represents the me…

> I guess US doesn't have a body like the EU Commission, that is not elected and that represents the interests of the "deep state".

The Commission is the executive branch, so maybe an equivalent would be the Executive Departments?

Re: Fight Chat Control

#422

Post by thrance »

phendrenad2 wrote: post #256

The end of anonymity online basically means an end to the internet era itself. We will effectively be rewinding time to the 1980s, when the only news sources were controlled by oligopolies, and dissident voices were simply not given a platform. That might be fine in a world where every country is on-board, but now that the internet exists, countries with anonymous free speech will come out ahead. Here's a darker thou…

Not a defense of chat control, which I am very much against, but can you really claim that the internet gave "dissident voices" a platform?

Media is arguably even more tightly controlled than in the 1980s, legacy media is owned by a few billionairew, right-wing influencers are all paid hacks, with a lot of them relaying pro-Russia propaganda. Meanwhile, genuine independent journalists are buried under algorithmic nonsense promoting ragebait and hate.

The internet very much failed to deliver a new era of feee speech. Instead, our conversations are now hosted on a few platforms and controlled by the oligarchs that own them, who are able to editorialize out dissenting voices and promote their own disgusting viewpoints.

Re: Fight Chat Control

#423

Post by aprilfoo »

In short: everything and everyone is suspect and need to approved by technocratic superior authorities and zealot private organizations. Yesterday China, USA, Russia, UK, India etc and today the EU aligning with North Korean style of control on people.

This is a mind boggling recipe for disaster, a worldwide dystopian nightmare coming true with an unprecedented but quite predictable series of consequences. Next step: compulsory installation of CCTV inside every home?

Re: Fight Chat Control

#424

Post by lan321 »

circlefavshape wrote: post #416
lan321 wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a weird spin on it. Young people are curious. They watch weird porn out of curiosity, the same way they watch gore. Hiding it isn't going to do them any favours. They'll get it from sketchier places instead. I know the generation before mine often went to trashy hookers way underage, with group collected money, to lose their V card, for example. Where I'm from, it's a pretty common saying that sex is for prest…

> where I'm from, it's a pretty common saying that sex is for prestige and a wank is for joy. !!! Where are you from?

Balkans, to not dox this acc too much.

Re: Fight Chat Control

#425

Post by graemep »

isaacremuant wrote: post #175
ncr100 wrote: post #149

WTFF. Fight !! Why is this Thought Policing tolerated? Are we so End Stage Growth Economy that EVERY power broker see now as the time to employer (IC)Enforcement? Gestapo much, anyone?

> Why is this Thought Policing tolerated? Because it's what everyone and their mother was calling for during covid to fight the dangerous for opposing authoritarian policies. Because we have to stop Russia, the republicans, extremists, anti war protests who are actually just , because we have to protect kids, or fight racism... It was all bullshit and people loved it. Now it's almost too late. If you don't reject it…

Yes, very few people want free speech for their opponents.

They want free speech for what they agree with, or at least think tolerable.

The principle of free speech as a right everyone has, has been lost.

Re: Fight Chat Control

#426

Post by aprilfoo »

miroljub wrote: post #417

As much as we are fighting Chat Control, we also need a plan B. What do we do if EU regime really enact it? Which messengers could we use then? What were the practical alternatives? Self hosted, decentralized, encrypted, standard based, ... , the only thing that comes to mind is something like delta.chat for texts, which builds upon a standard mail protocol. Can we do something better than that?

Security is always a cat and mouse game, solutions already exist and more will come soon anyway. It's just technology after all. The problem now is not for the mice, it's a matter of defending basic human rights.

Re: Fight Chat Control

#427

Post by kvgr »

miroljub wrote: post #420
msgodel wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds to me like the Europeans need to have an actual fight (that is with bullets and artillery) with this weird EU pseudo government thing. It sounds like a loss for them to me.

Many Europeans just wait for the Russia to come and save us from the totalitarian regimes once again.

There is no alternative is there. Russia bad for obvious reasons. EU rules getting more and more tight. Lets see what happens with digital euro and forced investing in EU markets. Eu is ruled by gerontocrats and detached leftists. The extreme right is not solution. Most of EU MPs from small countries are literal nobodies, just bench warmers.

Re: Fight Chat Control

#428

Post by stephen_g »

raxxorraxor wrote: post #382
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…

News organization welcome any barrier to social media networks, they are heavily biased on these topics. The "modern" journalist of today doesn't really care about freedom of information either. Speaking of which, the EU is also working on a "free speech" law for journalists and against them being arbitrarily banned by platforms. One would think this law could easily be extended to everyone since it is not at all tri…

We have this issue massively in Australia too - literally almost 100% of the push to implement a social media ban (where ‘social media’ is anything that an unelected bureaucrat called the ‘eSafety commissioner’ feels like, which, for example, wasn’t going to include YouTube until they changed their mind) came from a single Murdoch newspaper campaign. It just wasn’t a thing anybody else was talking about, and then suddenly it was apparently the most important thing the federal Government could be doing that apparently had to be rushed through in about two weeks with almost no oversight (normally here it can take years to get reform that normal people have been long calling for into Parliament) - honestly it was absolutely bizarre.

I have no hesitation saying that the newspaper that pushed it doesn’t give a single damn about the kids - they have a serious hatred of Meta in particular but also Google. The whole thing was concern trolling because they were angry that they are going to get cut off from the last shakedown they lobbied for (called the media bargaining code).

Re: Fight Chat Control

#429

Post by sillysaurusx »

torginus wrote: post #400
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…

EU is like: We will protect your sensitive personal documents so that only trusted government institutions and ones held to the highest standards of privacy (such as banks) may have access to it. This is to prevent abuse and identity theft. Also please upload them to BigBootyXXX.com if you want to have a wank

At the end of the day, "think of the children" has been an ancient rallying cry that’s used to justify all kinds of bad behavior. Often ironic, as you say.

Also banks were one of the most vulnerable. I’ve often wondered why. My first reaction is "because their code comes from coders who only want to work at a bank," but I don’t want to be unfair. Perhaps it’s "from people comfortable with lots of bureaucracy". Either way, when I was a pentester, banks were one of our main types of clients, and their code was often bad. So it’s doubly ironic to claim banks are exemplars of how to do privacy.

Re: Fight Chat Control

#430

Post by ragmodel226 »

protocolture wrote: post #205
ragmodel226 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a defeatist and damaging attitude. It detracts from the core issue at hand, which is EU government forcing code being run in private messaging apps over data before it is encrypted. It defeats the security model of end to end encrypted messaging, and leads to a society that cannot trust its communications against government interference ever again. One can criticize analysis of mass surveillance of metadata a…

Australia already has this capability and is likely using it for 5 Eyes nations. Questioning the desire to surveil seems on topic when this is pretty much everywhere already.

Australia can’t get technical capability notices for anything that matters, maybe some local trash only. (Don’t use Australian software or products folks).

American tech will tell them to pound sand, and you got another international incident in the media.

Post reply on HN