Top
Best
New

Posted by rapnie 13 hours ago

EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0(www.patrick-breyer.de)
929 points | 455 commentspage 7
like_any_other 13 hours ago|
> In these talks, the EU Parliament is pushing for a paradigm shift in how we approach online child safety, demanding: [..] Strict security standards for messaging apps (“Security by Design”) to prevent cyber grooming.

It's dispiriting to see a supposedly pro-privacy politician launder backdoors as "strict security standards".

vrganj 13 hours ago|
I think they mean local scanning for CSAM - which feels like a reasonable solution that preserves privacy, but still addresses the real problem of, y'know, child abuse?
simiones 12 hours ago|||
What is the false positive rate that you would be comfortable with such a scan having? What would be the risk of your personal photos and videos being recognized as CSAM and reported to your local police (and thus being shown to your local police) that you would be happy to accept?

Would you also be ok with not being allowed to send any mail unless you first scan the contents of everything in that envelope and include a generated signature that might tell the post office that you're sending CSAM? And then having the envelope delivered directly to police if the scan did indicate that?

budududuroiu 10 hours ago||||
If local scanning of CSAM flags a post, that post will have to be analysed by a human operator. If you send a sensitive photo of your kid's rash to your spouse, and it gets flagged, are you ok with a random cyber enforcement officer seeing your child in that way?
zelphirkalt 2 hours ago||
Pedos would definitely know what job to work in.
u8080 10 hours ago||||
Okay, since it is already working system - how could I verify it scans for CSAM, not my dissident books and saved eps*ein files?
ibejoeb 8 hours ago||||
I have a question: who trains the CSAM model?
like_any_other 11 hours ago|||
Weaponizing our own property against us, mandating that it spies and tattles on us, turning inanimate objects into policemen to construct the most total surveillance dystopia, is not in any way "reasonable". In no way does it "preserve privacy".

And let's not pretend there are not already many other ways in which child abuse is detected and fought. When schoolteachers or doctors or neighbors or other family members notice something is amiss, when a CSAM group is infiltrated by police, or when a predator falls for a honeypot. This triggers an investigation, and at that point no digital lock can withstand modern targeted covert surveillance. But we are supposed to pretend none of this exists, and that encryption is an unassailable castle, and play along with the "going dark" lie, despite being more surveilled than at literally any point in history, including under the Stasi.

They only don't address child abuse, if by "child abuse" is meant a photo existing in some private shared-with-nobody hard drive, and not an actual human child being abused.

spwa4 10 hours ago||
Majority AGAINST, passes anyway:

314 against, 276 in favor, 17 abstentions

In case anyone wants to know: stopping it would have required 361 against.

hananova 9 hours ago|
And more than a hundred did not vote, if they wanted to vote no they could have. But they didn’t so they’re implicitly in favor.

The fact that governments worldwide do not force either a vote for or against is a much greater issue as it allows representatives to launder their beliefs through inaction.

ChrisArchitect 12 hours ago||
Related:

Chat Control 1.0 and 2.0 Explained

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48818311

Chat Control passed first round in EU Parliament

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48819008

elAhmo 11 hours ago||
This might get this control out, but people's anti-EU stance will just be increased by this and long-term this is a terrible move.

Just fueling material for right wingers who will take advantage of this and push for secessionist stuff.

EU is in dire need to have VERY POPULAR measures among people, not idiotic stuff like this which is a step in a wrong direction.

budududuroiu 10 hours ago|
You're asking too much from bureaucrats that stand to directly gain post-mandate by consulting the companies they legislate for, and also believe that the legitimacy of the EU as a whole should be driven by output (economic prosperity, etc), rather than input (democratic mandates, political participation of their constituents)
speedgoose 7 hours ago||
This is a very disappointing news. It weakens democracy and makes the EU hypocrite.

Why should one care about GDPR or some privacy shield thingy when this is going through ?

miroljub 13 hours ago||
And so, step by step, in the name of child protection and similar excuses, we lose liberties and rights one by one.

Welcome to the Brave New 1984 We World. Big Brother loves us.

We are living through the time best described by Zamyatin, Orwell, and Huxley.

netsharc 13 hours ago||
Man, the EU is supposed to be the beacon of liberal democracy (after the light of Reagan's shining city on the hill is now truly extinguishing), but with shit like this, it's really making enemies left and right (metaphorically and spectrally).
graemep 7 hours ago|||
The EU exists mostly to promote economic liberalism and free trade.

It started out as a purely trade arrangement, then evolved to become a broader union.

hsuduebc2 13 hours ago||||
Exactly. I consider myself euro federalist but bullshit like this creating a very strong antipathy.

If this is not some shady maneuver to scan user messages for security reason, because of, for example, possible incoming war then it's beyond absurd.

I would doubt that politicians pushing this are not understanding that pedophiles simply do not need to use these apps they are scanning. But I saw questioning of tech CEOs by older US officials and the lack of even basic knowledgeable about current technologies was ridiculously astounding.

dachworker 11 hours ago|||
Here's a thought: maybe liberal democracy was never very free.
netsharc 8 hours ago||
This "thought" is like a fart... No substance, leaves the receiver wondering "What am I meant to do with that?", and also asking "Do I care to ask for an elaboration?".
inigyou 12 hours ago|||
Chat Control 2.0 is in the name of child protection. This one, 1.0, is just in the name of pleasing big tech.
Otek 13 hours ago||
Slippery slope is fine and all but do you have any constructive argument?
ywvcbk 13 hours ago|||
Slippery slope is not a "fallacy" by default. It can be occasionally but its a perfectly reasonably argument in plenty of cases.
yladiz 12 hours ago|||
Sure, it's not a fallacy, but it does erode nuanced conversations and so it shouldn't be used without caution.
inigyou 12 hours ago|||
It is a fallacy by default. The existence and slipperiness of the slope must be justified to make it not a fallacy.
budududuroiu 10 hours ago||
The slipperiness comes from the fact that the EU already admits that scanning of private messages didn't improve the catching and prosecution of perpetrators. Also, the biggest lobbyists for breaking E2EE argue that criminals are moving to encrypted platforms, and targeting encrypted platforms is actually the thing we need to finally put a dent in stopping the dissemination of CSAM
miroljub 13 hours ago||||
Constructive argument? Just disband the EU as a whole, including all laws, treaties, contracts ...

Europe would be a much better place if the EU stayed what it was, a trade union of sovereign nations without any political power over the people.

sham1 13 hours ago|||
How would this have worked in practice though? How could things like trade standards been harmonised or a common currency adopted without the trade union being able to do legislation?

And once you get there, you're no longer a trade union. Or a trading block, which is probably the better word since a trade union already means something else.

inigyou 12 hours ago||||
It still is. Countries can ignore EU laws if they want to.
BSDobelix 9 hours ago||
I'm not sure what you try to achieve:

>For example, Poland was hit with massive daily fines when it was embroiled in a dispute over rule of law measures, as well as a separate case linked to environmental permits at a coal mine on the Czech border.

>The Commission is allowed to take these fines out of that country’s EU budget allocation, preventing governments from simply refusing to pay up.

https://www.brusselstimes.com/1568198/how-the-eu-punishes-it...

vrganj 13 hours ago|||
The EU was never just a trade union.
ekjhgkejhgk 13 hours ago||||
"Slippery slope" does not by itself invalidate an argument, because slippery slopes do exist.
netbioserror 13 hours ago|||
What "constructive" argument is anyone supposed to give about authorities having warrantless access to all private conversations?
flanked-evergl 12 hours ago||
I'm honestly confused about why this is on topic for HN.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

> Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It tramples curiosity.

Don't get me wrong, I feel a desire to engage with this as well, but there is nothing I can possibly say about this that is not political, because this is purely a political choice.

dTal 1 hour ago|
Conversely, declaring a space "politics-free" tramples a hell of a lot more than curiosity.

Incidentally, the comment immediately below this one begins with the words "I'm curious". So I think we're good.

vrganj 13 hours ago||
Brought to you - as always - by the Conservatives. Conservatism is just fascism with a slightly nicer image.
weberer 11 hours ago||
This was overwhelmingly approved by "The Left in the European Parliament" (that's their actual coalition name) as well as the Greens. It was overwhelmingly rejected by the European People's Party (AKA "The Right"). And mixed among other groups (S&D and Conservatives).

https://howtheyvote.eu/votes/195775

mizaru 11 hours ago|||
No, it's the other way around. Quoting another comment:

>"Yes" means stop control, because it's a "proposition de rejet" we're looking at. rejet = reject

vrganj 10 hours ago|||
Indeed. The vote, however, was about stopping Chat Control. The key term is "derogation" in the title.

A "yes" vote was a vote against Chat Control. It failed because it needed an absolute majority of 361/) votes to defeat the "urgent procedure" lawfare by Metsina, a conservative.

u8080 10 hours ago|||
EU conservatives are just moderate leftists, who cares.
vrganj 10 hours ago||
What are you even saying? As a leftist, I want nothing to do with those fascists.
u8080 9 hours ago|||
Okay, I am not EU citizen, let's see EPP's manifesto:

As a central part of its campaign for the European elections in 2009, the EPP approved its election manifesto at its Congress in Warsaw in April that year. The manifesto called for:[16]

- Creation of new jobs, continuing reforms and investment in education, lifelong learning, and employment to create opportunities for everyone (govt universal social investment, left)

- Avoidance of protectionism, and coordination of fiscal and monetary policies (pro-federal pro-centralisation)

- Increased transparency and surveillance in financial markets(more regulation on market)

- Making Europe the market leader in green technology. (increase govt involvement in economy)

- Increasing the share of renewable energy to at least 20 percent of the energy mix by 2020. (increase govt involvement in economy)

- Family-friendly flexibility for working parents, better child care and housing, family-friendly fiscal policies, encouragement of parental leave. (Pro-Worker's rights, social security)

-A new strategy to attract skilled workers from the rest of the world to make Europe's economy more competitive, more dynamic and more knowledge-driven (Pro-migration)

Could you explain how that's considered right-wing?

vrganj 9 hours ago||
> - Creation of new jobs, continuing reforms and investment in education, lifelong learning, and employment to create opportunities for everyone

- Avoidance of protectionism, and coordination of fiscal and monetary policies

- - Making Europe the market leader in green technology.

Market ideology -> Right wing

- Increasing the share of renewable energy to at least 20 percent of the energy mix by 2020.

Done through incentives, not nationalized industry -> market ideology, right wing.

- Family-friendly flexibility for working parents, better child care and housing, family-friendly fiscal policies, encouragement of parental leave

Classic birtherism -> right wing

- A new strategy to attract skilled workers from the rest of the world to make Europe's economy more competitive, more dynamic and more knowledge-driven

Importing cheap labor for European capitalists -> right wing

u8080 9 hours ago||
>Market ideology -> Right wing >Done through incentives, not nationalized industry -> market ideology, right wing.

Yeah, compared to communists they are right, but even socialists does not push against market economy and if you consider socialists right-wing - we have a huge de-sync on definitions level I guess.

cynicalsecurity 6 hours ago|||
I have some bad news for you, the Chat Control was originally brought up by the left. Mainly by Ylva Johansson (Swedish Social Democrat, S&D group). Leftist origin via Johansson/S&D, but later sustained by mainstream centrists and now a watered down version is partly supported by conservatives too.

Left fascism was not so long ago. Think of the woke hysteria, black lives matter, cancelling on twitter, people losing their jobs because of them saying something the left ideology did not like etc.

Left have been and still are viciously hateful and racist towards white people. So if you are left and while, you are basically destroying your own livelihood.

Conservative Poland, Italy and Ireland are strictly against Chat Control. Well, at least against the worse version of it.

omicronxt 3 hours ago||
Liberals are not leftists ffs. S&D are liberals, if you go to the wiki page you can see that they are labeled centre-left. Centre-left in this case stands for left wing of liberalism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Party_of_England_and_Wal...

This is an example of party which can be called leftist. It's actually even listed as that on wiki. Minimal condition in general is to be anti-capitalistic.

marginalia_nu 12 hours ago||
Eh, the commies are pretty good at this too. Best analogy for Chat Control is really a digital Stasi.
vrganj 12 hours ago||
I mean sure, but there's no meaningful commie contingent in the EU.

The war on privacy at the EU level always comes from conservatives.

cryptokent 2 hours ago||
[dead]
AlanAzarkin 10 hours ago|
[flagged]
More comments...