71–80 of 163 posts
Good old salami tactics still work. Same goes for going way over target to then settle for your actual goal. Good old democracy at work.
One thing with chat control I don't get is why can't it be vetoed by a single member? That doesn't seem like part of regular trade policy competency of the EU
>At the beginning of the month, the Danish Presidency decided to change its approach with a new compromise text that makes the chat scanning voluntary, instead. Hmm, so this will probably make the life for those who don't scan quite hard and if they experience a high profile scandal getting out of it will not be easy I assume. I'm not sure what to think of it, not being mandatory and requiring risk assessment sounds…
As far as the mass surveillance scanning goes, it has completely been removed, and what remains is still the mandatory age checks, which might be problematic.
From reading the specification, it appears to be reasonably well designed, where identification is handled by authorities, and the requesting party cannot get your identification details, only send an "is the user of this session older than 18". The verifier cannot see which site the request comes from, and you identify yourself in the session, and a reply goes back to the requester with a "yes/no" answer.
So, it at least appears to be simply an age check, and not some sort of surveillance program to stalk your online browsing habits.
Misleading title, the council approves their mandate for negotiations with parliament. It’s still a long way to go before it turns into law and I think it’s rather unpopular in parliament.
There's been so much drama over the years about this proposal from the commission I doubt von der Leyen will want to fight to get the scanning back in.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What about going out in front of your city hall with a poster saying no-chat-control? You risk nothing, do you?
> What about going out in front of your city hall with a poster saying no-chat-control? Unorganized, individual acts cannot change anything in the EU. > You risk nothing, do you? Given the legislative maze the EU has become, you can't be sure of that, but you surely gain nothing. The conditions in Europe are quite specific, and in that environment, pan-EU legislation (except the customs union) should be optional for…
See Greta Thunberg; she might not have managed to save the planet yet, but she sure got the attention of the world (of course, however big a problem chat control is, climate change is a much bigger issue)
Honest question. The EU was created as an economic and trade institution. How has it morphed into a wierd political institution, which NATO was already supposed to be? The root question: how did an organization that ushered in things like the Euro become a body that decides whether Europeans are allowed to have personal privacy?
You speak as if the EU is somehow divorced from the national governments, and is imposing its will to the helpless states that compose it. The commissioners that propose laws are appointed by each national government. The national governments of each member state is all in on this. NATO is not a political institution. It is a defense treaty (this one completely outside the realm of democracy).
Why follow the EU's press release instead of stating what's happening? The EU parliament voted - many times. They voted AGAINST having this law at all. The EU council is now threatening to fully override parliament, but "gives parliament another chance" to agree, in hopes this makes the member states more likely to cooperate. More correct would be to state the in power EU governments have decided to use the EU counci…