Nudge the door open with child abuse "concern" and then expand to your hearts content later. The analogy of it being like a police officer standing next to you while you chat online to a friend was great. He was joking when he said "lets cancel cars" but it might happen in the distant future. Letting people control heavy projectiles doesnt seem like such a great idea.
sniff encrypted chats, hahaha. Some law makers are completely clueless. I like Louis Rossmann. He looks like he’s been up stressed for weeks, yet his arguments are pretty level headed.
I wonder what the chances are that the ECJ could look at employing actions for annulment against chat control, if it is passed. It is possible for private individuals to ask the court to annul an EU act that directly concerns them. So even if governmental structures across EU does not want it challenged, the issue could still be brought to the court.
Louis makes it sound that its actually for protecting the children but we all know its just an excuse for surveillance, control, and ultimately jailing people for wrong opinions (a real threat in the EU since there is no protection of Freedom of Speech anywhere)
Isn’t EU’s justification that they protect you from companies / private industry but they want full government/police control because that’s trusted / socialist?
Start with protecting children. Then something about misinformation. Then about defending democracy. Then about stopping terrorism. And soon you can escalate your authoritarian policy to just about anything.
This is why having the structure of fundamental civil rights, like in the US constitution, is important. I’m surprised the EU doesn’t seem to have such protections for free speech and privacy and against warrantless surveillance.
Is it possible to make an encrypted messenger app without a central authority? Like BitTorrent magnet links. We all share the messages to support the network bandwidth, but can only see the messages which pertain to us? From my really novice understanding of cryptography, this should be possible. And it seems like the only privacy focused solution for the future.
that's what I am thinking, EU made GDPR that is good move prevent any third party to extract privacy data illegally but still doing it to themselves anyway
Drop the “chat” and just call it “control”. The current proposal is so vague it would cover anything with online sharing/syncing people can sign up for. Any SaaS, any app, any service. Chat, email, file syncing, todo lists, doesn’t matter.
Not only is the current proposal "vague", the current proposal also is most likely illegal. The EU courts already have ruled that legislation which weakens/breaks encryption goes against the EU fundamental rights.
EU logic: Want to centrally track users with personally identifiably information? Great! Want to store anonymized data with local cookies, that the user can delete, disable, or doctor at any time? That should be heavily restricted with constant intrusive warnings.
The EU lets you store whatever you want in cookies as long as they are truly anonymous (do not contain unique identifiers.) What you call "anonymized data" is literally the opposite.
"What do you mean you and your friend chat over Signal when there are dozens of other chat apps? Sounds like you two have something to hide, if you ask me." [0]
Whenever I hear someone telling me they have nothing to hide, I ask them to unlock their phone and hand it to me. The joke still goes over people heads sometimes.
That's a bad argument - people trust the government differently than each-other. They also (should) mistrust the government differently. Voting is secret for a reason. How much of a chance do you think we have of meaningfully changing a government, if they can guess with 80% degree accuracy how everyone voted, based on their chats and social networks? When they know ahead of time who is assembling a new political party? When they know all of their friend's friends dirty secrets, and will tactically leak them to the press? Or simply prosecute them for spreading hate/antisemitism/homosexual propaganda/some other vague crime?
Knowledge is power. Does it feel like the balance of power is currently tilted too far in favor of individuals?
I think it's better to move past the individual question entirely. I tell them to imagine whatever political power they fear the most and ask themselves how it would likely behave if it knew nobody could coordinate against it in secret.
I have rather little to hide myself but I want desperately for you to be able to hide something. Otherwise we're together a worse deterrent against authorities behaving badly as we would otherwise be.
> I ask them to unlock their phone and hand it to me
Let’s say they do that. What would you do next? Go over their photos? Private messages with their so? And then what? Laugh at something that you found there? Would you feel then that you proved some point? I just don’t understand how this scenario would play out in real life
These days I use the automated pricing of Uber, and groceries based on the person and/or time of day, what apps you have on your phone, etc as the reason why we DEFINITELY want more privacy.
Without it, we are being manipulated because of all the stuff these parasites now know about us. All in the name of "enhancing the customer experience".. #puke
I tried I2P not so long ago and was quite impressed by the design decisions and the quality of the technology. It's truly an amazing piece of software that covers basically everything you need for a distributed network.
The only thing missing is actually the community and usage, because the technology has a network effect, and more users with stable routers provide faster and a more reliable network. So it's indeed slow at the moment. I highly recommend giving it a chance and playing a bit with it. Even for non-anonymity and security cases, it's fun to play with hole punching, global addressing by public keys, and stuff like that, which you can see in things like Iroh and libp2p.
It provides a simple universal SAM interface and libraries to work with it to plug other apps.
What if we make chats obfuscated instead of encrypted? So send a lot more data per sentence/word. It would need some sort of key on both sides to make sense of the data but it would be hard to use it without it. Or would that fall under the definition encryption?
And what people in western, democratic world think about it? That this is just fine? I live in autocratic, almost dictatorship regime country and for the past 100 years we've just gotten used to the idea that we don't have any rules here. But I thought in EU and US things are different. All these news stories about Control, UK surveillance, age verification, all this stuff with no significant reaction baffle me.
> And what people in western, democratic world think about it?
People are usually asked to 'think about the children'. Pedophiles, drugs, suicides, self-harm, cyberbullying; and whatever other horror stories the media has at hand. This maneuver is usually sufficient to neutralize the opposition.
There are no rules in the US anymore either. We just pardoned 1500 criminals who tried to overthrow the government and kill representative.
The President is accepting bribes (Paramount, Disney, Twitter, Facebook, Apple) and he is being allowed to use power that constitutionally is suppose to belong to the Congress.
Are politicians really exempt? Must be some really high profile pedophiles, or pedophile supporters between them, like those in the Hungarian government - they support this by the way.
IIUC, no, they are not excempt. Certain professional contexts are excempt from surveillance, including political work, police work, military work and some corporate work. This is intended to prevent state or corporate secrets to be subject to surveillance.
I am not sure how it will be implemented that politicians are only excempt when texting about work. It seems like any implementation will allow politicians to avoid surveillance by using their work phone.
60 comments
[ 2.4 ms ] story [ 70.8 ms ] threadFascinating to watch.
(Downvoted, as expected. The hypocrisy on this site is absolutely adorable.)
This is why having the structure of fundamental civil rights, like in the US constitution, is important. I’m surprised the EU doesn’t seem to have such protections for free speech and privacy and against warrantless surveillance.
Edit: looks like it exists, and is called Briar.
like what's happening????
I remember reading their names being blacked out.
Whenever I hear someone telling me they have nothing to hide, I ask them to unlock their phone and hand it to me. The joke still goes over people heads sometimes.
[0]: https://idiallo.com/blog/nothing-to-hide
Alternatively, you also ask them to release the Epstein files... :-)
Knowledge is power. Does it feel like the balance of power is currently tilted too far in favor of individuals?
I have rather little to hide myself but I want desperately for you to be able to hide something. Otherwise we're together a worse deterrent against authorities behaving badly as we would otherwise be.
Let’s say they do that. What would you do next? Go over their photos? Private messages with their so? And then what? Laugh at something that you found there? Would you feel then that you proved some point? I just don’t understand how this scenario would play out in real life
Without it, we are being manipulated because of all the stuff these parasites now know about us. All in the name of "enhancing the customer experience".. #puke
The only thing missing is actually the community and usage, because the technology has a network effect, and more users with stable routers provide faster and a more reliable network. So it's indeed slow at the moment. I highly recommend giving it a chance and playing a bit with it. Even for non-anonymity and security cases, it's fun to play with hole punching, global addressing by public keys, and stuff like that, which you can see in things like Iroh and libp2p.
It provides a simple universal SAM interface and libraries to work with it to plug other apps.
People are usually asked to 'think about the children'. Pedophiles, drugs, suicides, self-harm, cyberbullying; and whatever other horror stories the media has at hand. This maneuver is usually sufficient to neutralize the opposition.
The President is accepting bribes (Paramount, Disney, Twitter, Facebook, Apple) and he is being allowed to use power that constitutionally is suppose to belong to the Congress.
Just one example from the many:
https://edition.cnn.com/2024/02/17/europe/hungary-child-abus...
Here he is on television promoting it in 1982 [1].
- [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Cohn-Bendit#Allegations...
- [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6IOAaSFpVCw
I am not sure how it will be implemented that politicians are only excempt when texting about work. It seems like any implementation will allow politicians to avoid surveillance by using their work phone.