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

Chat Control Must Be Stopped

privacyguides.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 272 posts

Re: Chat Control Must Be Stopped

#91

Post by ToValueFunfetti »

icameron wrote: post #71
ToValueFunfetti wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cable everything is dead. FOX is doing relatively well, but they reach maybe 1% or 2% of the population, and presumably that's almost all already unshifting right-wing people. I'm not saying it's impossible that it's a propaganda power center, but I don't personally know how that would work. It feels like a leftover enemy from the early 2000s that just doesn't make sense post-internet.

"According to data from Nielsen, Fox News — from the period spanning June 20 through Sept. 1 — finished as the no. 1 network in all of broadcast television during the primetime hours of 8-11 PM. During those hours, Fox News averaged 2.43 million total nightly viewers in primetime — topping ABC at 2.38 million, NBC at 2.21 million, and CBS at 2.03 million. It is the second time in the network’s history they accomplish…

If I gather right-wing propaganda retweets, what fraction do you think will be retweets of FOX clips versus retweets of a right-wing propaganda twitter account? I don't have a methodology in mind, but I'm curious and will come up with something if you think substantially higher than me (My understanding is that Nielsen does track what people encounter at hotels etc. (though only recently), so that should be included (?)

Re: Chat Control Must Be Stopped

#92

Post by varispeed »

pas wrote: post #33
api wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would it be correct to compare the EU's autocratic pronouncements to Presidential executive orders in the US? In the sense that they can pass whatever they want with little feedback but then the courts can tear them apart?

It's ridiculously different, there's no single person or country that can do anything like that there are multiple ways to make EU law, there are regulations (that apply directly) and directives that member states need to implement (basically ratify) the Commission proposed something and then the Council votes on it and then there's the EP which votes on it this one is a regulation proposal https://en.m.wikipedia.org…

Why this even got to a stage of being official?

It's something a Nazi regime would implement today had it existed.

There is no one in the EU that would tell those people are you fkin insane and give them a sack?

Re: Chat Control Must Be Stopped

#93

Post by nullc »

BoredPositron wrote: post #36
Humorist2290 wrote: post #10

> Chat Control would make it mandatory for all service providers (text messaging, email, social media, cloud storage, hosting services, etc.) to scan all communications and all files (including end-to-end encrypted ones), in order to supposedly detect whatever the government deems "abusive material." I wonder why there has been such silence on this, with the exception of a handful of well written blog posts. The scop…

Fatigue? We are fighting this with different names since 2002. I guess normal people just can't hear about it anymore and that's probably on purpose.

the price of Liberty is eternal vigilance

Re: Chat Control Must Be Stopped

#94

Post by thw_9a83c »

As both an EU citizen and a computer programmer, I applaud this article, and I generally agree with its sentiment. But let's be realistic. Chat control is going to happen sooner or later. This is a Hacker News forum. The audience here is very knowledgeable about computer science and fully aware of how technologically impractical the idea of fighting CSAM in this way is. But the general public is somewhere else entirely. They genuinely believe that this will help, to whatever they think it will help. They have no idea that real CSAM distributors will simply adapt by encrypting files into ZIP (or whatever) with strong passwords or using different channels. I've tried explaining this to some of my non-IT friends and family members. I think they now think I'm a pedophile. It's kind of stupid for a father of two teenage daughters, but that's the general public. They want it; they'll get it.

Re: Chat Control Must Be Stopped

#95

Post by mnls »

Don't worry people. If you are not a European let me tell you how it goes.

The 'Unofficial' boss of European Union is Germany. If Germany will vote against it, more countries will back off and it won't pass. If Germany wants ChatControl, it's over. It will pass and all other undecided countries will support it.

Thankfully, Germany (so far) is against it.

Re: Chat Control Must Be Stopped

#96

Post by 3np »

jonaharagon wrote: post #65
dkdcio wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ah this is the relevant piece, which I did skim over given I was getting annoyed at paragraph after paragraph not telling me what it is: > Chat Control would make it mandatory for all service providers (text messaging, email, social media, cloud storage, hosting services, etc.) to scan all communications and all files (including end-to-end encrypted ones), in order to supposedly detect whatever the government deems "…

I shared your comment with the author and we're going to reorder some of the sentences in a little bit to highlight the fact it's a backdoor earlier. We've talked about Chat Control so much over so many years (because it keeps reappearing) that it's easy to forget many haven't heard of it lol

I think one source of confusion is that many probably see "Chat Control", expecting it to be a reference to one specific proposal or legislation (a la "GDPR" or "DMA"), while it's an umbrella term you use to group different proposals pushing the same agenda and end-results. Readers look for one face to point at but it's a hydra and they just leave confused.

Clearly defining the term and its intended meaning would do well, I think.

Re: Chat Control Must Be Stopped

#97

Post by causal »

The article gives some examples of scope creep but missed the biggest one IMO: copyright enforcement. I suspect if you follow the money, copyright is what keeps things like Chat Control coming back. Fully expect Sony, Disney and other IP to be added to the list of flagged content, keeping us safe from dangerous pirates.

Re: Chat Control Must Be Stopped

#98

Post by PhantomHour »

bapak wrote: post #14

Looking at the long list of faces for my country, it boggles my mind how all these people are fine letting the police just scan their phone, photos, messages at will, as if they don't have significant others or medical pictures on their phones, including of their children. Do they think they're above it? Are they stupid and don't know what they vote for? I do not understand.

> Do they think they're above it? Are they stupid and don't know what they vote for?

They're somewhat out of touch with tech, and caught up in police narratives around encrypted apps blocking their attempts to find pedos. Tech firm lobbyists sell them some lies about the capabilities of these systems.

Ultimately these are politicians stuck in the notion of "but the police can open your [physical] letters, this isn't any different" completely unaware of how times have moved on.

Matters like how people are already being harassed by CSAM being sent to their DMs, how people raid discord servers and try to have them taking down by spamming CSAM, etc, are completely lost on these politicians.

On top of that it's just cowardice. Not daring to be seen as "aiding pedos".

Re: Chat Control Must Be Stopped

#99

Post by eigenspace »

thw_9a83c wrote: post #94

As both an EU citizen and a computer programmer, I applaud this article, and I generally agree with its sentiment. But let's be realistic. Chat control is going to happen sooner or later. This is a Hacker News forum. The audience here is very knowledgeable about computer science and fully aware of how technologically impractical the idea of fighting CSAM in this way is. But the general public is somewhere else entire…

I dont think it should be taken as a given that it'll happen. While this may be something the public is generally in favour of or ambivalent towards, there's a LOT of EU countries and MEPs that are not at all in favour of this, and already a few EU countries whose courts have ruled that this would violate their constitutions.

While its certainly possible it'll happen, it's far from certain. It can be stopped. Of all the currently 'undecided' countries, if just Germany came out against it, that'd be enough to sink it. Germans are pretty pro-privacy people, and the government would win no popularity by supporting it. Even if the German government supported it though, the German MEPs would likely still end up mostly voting no

Re: Chat Control Must Be Stopped

#100

Post by nullc »

coldblues wrote: post #21

Even without Chat Control, I still self-censor even in private communications. The majority of people you chat with show complete disregard for your privacy. They piss on it. There are very basic requirements that a minuscule amount of people follow, like: full-disk encryption, using a password manager, being aware of your rights to protect yourself against searches, having good computer hygiene and competency. The l…

Even in places with generally strong protection against state search you have almost no privacy if someone drags you into civil court. Not only can state opponents attack you there including through pretextual claims, but you're also open to attack by numerous non-governmental entities.

Online/electronic privacy advocacy is in my view overly fixated on direct state invasions via law enforcement powers and corporate surveillance through ad data, while largely ignoring threats via hacking or civil litigation.

The best policy is to not record things that shouldn't be made public. The next best step is to not retain recorded things longer than needed. Modern software/operating systems largely make either of those steps quite difficult, leaking tons of data with every use, making it impossible to reliably delete material, etc. But nothing less is effective against the full spectrum of threats, not even strong encryption. (but obviously strong encryption is good and critical for what you do record and retain!)

Post reply on HN