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

EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

patrick-breyer.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

931–940 of 947 posts

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#931

Post by metoobruh »

mrtnmrtn wrote: post #894
TacticalCoder wrote: post #879

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What corrupt things has Ursula done? Or what has she been accused of, exactly? I'm pretty sure that, for a start, backroom deals with Pfizer during the Covid pandemic. She's been accused of deleting evidence (like SMS) and pressuring companies to delete evidence if I'm not mistaken. I don't know what GP means exactly but the EU institutions are a special jurisdiction: for example a belgian policeman cannot go insid…

« I’m pretty sure that » and « if I’m not mistaken » are not words I’m glad to read on HN for such serious accusations. I’m far from being on the commission side on those cases and think that if you want to make a serious case you have to be more rigorous with the evidence and things you say

No, he really doesn't.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#932

Post by bryanrasmussen »

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #616
philipallstar wrote: post #473

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a terrible principle to think like this, though. People shouldn't be sanctioned because it might not be too bad in practice.

sure, but people shouldn't lie about what the current consequence of things are either. I'm pretty sure I'm closer to death and homelessness than Xavier Moreau is. on edit: also I think the whole death and homelessness worry expressed seems sort of weird, because I think the normal order would be homelessness and death. I may die soon, but in that context I will not actually be worrying about homelessness. Maybe that…

huh, funny, I guess I was really tired because it was evidently me that switched around death and homelessness from homelessness and death.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#933

Post by mike_hearn »

patates wrote: post #764
mike_hearn wrote: post #669

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not that weird. There are other cases like it. Jacques Baud is a Swiss guy and was sanctioned by the EU Commission for "spreading Russian propaganda". At the time he was living in Brussels and the EU became a prison that he's not allowed to leave. https://www.rts.ch/info/suisse/2025/article/ancien-espion-su... The sanctions imposed on December 15 by the European Union against Jacques Baud and eleven other people…

Thanks for the example but there being other cases and me as an average person who follows the news having no idea about all this make it even weirder for me.

European media is extremely pro EU and generally doesn't publish anything that might undermine support for it. This is one reason so many across Europe were baffled by Brexit. Their media kept them in the dark about problems the British media and politicians had spent decades highlighting.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#934

Post by LtWorf »

mike_hearn wrote: post #933
patates wrote: post #764

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the example but there being other cases and me as an average person who follows the news having no idea about all this make it even weirder for me.

European media is extremely pro EU and generally doesn't publish anything that might undermine support for it. This is one reason so many across Europe were baffled by Brexit. Their media kept them in the dark about problems the British media and politicians had spent decades highlighting.

And now UK is the perfect utopia! Lol

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#935

Post by ywvcbk »

inigyou wrote: post #818
ywvcbk wrote: post #705

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In plenty of cases it's absolutely self evident (especially when there are plenty of historical precedents for similar or analogous situations). Yes you can get involved in extended arguments with people arguing in bad faith or whose world view is fundamentally incompatible with your but that's usually just a waste of time (I mean you wouldn't argue with Nazis either just the same as with people trying to institute a…

"it's absolutely self evident" is usually code for "I have no evidence so you must take this on faith"

Do you have any evidence to back this claim?

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#936

Post by solidsnack9000 »

int_19h wrote: post #924
solidsnack9000 wrote: post #830

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The page you link contains many interesting examples; but many of them are simply cases of making the vote harder -- requiring unanimous consent to change English-French bilingualism in Canada, for example -- rather than cases where the law simply can not ever be changed by a vote. With regards to Germany, the page says: ...if a constitution provides for a mechanism of its own abolition or replacement, like the Germa…

Ultimately it doesn't matter what the constitution says if a large enough supermajority is unhappy about it. Constitutions by themselves are pieces of paper, they only work when society as a whole chooses to treat them as more than that.

That is true; but that is also something fundamentally different.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#937

Post by Pragmata »

ivan_gammel wrote: post #424
Pragmata wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The court approved the sanctions when he tried to challenge them.

I do not think this is true. Do you have any proof? I‘m aware only of German court refusing to apply urgent procedure to unblock his bank accounts. The sanctions were applied not that long ago for him to get decision by German courts or ECJ.

https://www.berliner-zeitung.de/article/gericht-bestaetigt-k...

You're right, it's about the injunction.

Can you explain how he is supposed to house and feed a family of 5 on 500€ a month?

Or is this a "he should starve to death" situation?

What right does the EU even have to "sanction" a German citizen? None.

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#938

Post by exfalso »

int_19h wrote: post #923
exfalso wrote: post #793

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you talking about. You think service providers can backdoor aes-gcm? There will always be technology that they cannot get around. The only way to backdoor is to explicitly change the encryption.

Service providers like say Apple and Google can push an update to your phone which will intercept all that data after it has been decrypted.

I understand. So don't use them. There are plenty of OS alternatives

Re: EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0

#940

Post by ImJamal »

LtWorf wrote: post #686
tenthirtyam wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think I'm one of those to whom you refer (except that I'm already "awake", or at least I like to think so). I'm normally pro-EU but this chat control is anathema to me. I'll be voting anti-EU in future I think.

> I'll be voting anti-EU in future I think. You mean the far right that talks about EU all the time and loves when EU does things like this?

AfD doesn't support this. I don't know about other right wing parties.
Post reply on HN