> The last chance for an agreement under Danish leadership is in December; the government in Copenhagen apparently preferred a compromise without chat control to no agreement at all. The current regulation, which allows the large platform providers to voluntarily and actively search for potential depictions of abuse, expires next spring after extension. It is precisely this voluntariness that Denmark's Minister of Justice now wants to codify within the framework of the future CSA regulation, which also contains a multitude of other, less controversial projects. [1]
Its like a ocean wave, crashing against the cliff, year in, year out, proposal after proposal, waiting for that final atrocity, justifying pushing it through.
The white cliffs of Dover, with no plan on how to regain one day that land, once the crisis subsides. And no mechanism to prevent a permanent crisis, because the controls justify the manufacturing of endless crisis.
It's interesting that Peter Hummelgaard's former party comrade Henrik Sass Larsen recently got 4 months of prison for possession of child porn; 6200 pictures and 2200 videos.
So we are to believe Hummelgaard wants to protect children by enabling vast surveillance, so all the bad offenders out there can get ... 4 months in prison.
Its not really adding up. And he still hasn't presented any argument for the thing except that you are pro child abuse if you don't agree with him. I'm at the point where I hope he's corrupt and its not just all about power for him.
Yeah, when the punishment for thousands of images and videos is just four months, it really puts the whole "we need mass surveillance to protect kids" narrative under a harsh light
If I was a conspiracy theorist I might think that the ruling class who so desperately want these kinds of powers are intentionally dividing nations and breaking down social cohesion so the populace must turn to the governments for protection. They're hoping to create societies where the people will beg them to scan private messages rather than to demand rights.
Give it another 10 years the way things are going, and I'm sure it will be back.
The main purpose is to identify any nascent organization of political opposition to the status quo so it can be destroyed in its infancy with a minimum amount of resources. It will be used to solve some crimes too but solving crimes still involves a lot of manpower (expensive) and if they solved crime people would be less supportive of expanding surveillance powers even further so you don't really want to do a great job at that.
I don’t trust Peter Hummelgaard at all. The way he is pushing for this law seems suspicious and I am wondering if there is a third party nudging him to pursue it. Maybe promising some position in the EU parlament.
I’m continually astounded that so many people, faced with a societal problem, reflexively turn to “Hmmm, perhaps if we monitored and read and listened to every single thing that every person does, all of the time…”
As though it would 1) be a practical possibility and 2) be effective.
Compounding the issue is that the more technology can solve #1, the more these people fixate on it as the solution without regards to the lack of #2.
I wish there were a way, once and for all, to prevent this ridiculous idea from taking hold over and over again. If I could get a hold of such people when these ideas were in their infancy… perhaps I should monitor everything everyone does and watch for people considering the same as a solution to their problem… ah well, no, still don’t see how that follows logically as a reasonable solution.
The real root cause of many societal problems is that a significant portion of the population everywhere across the world is either unable or unwilling to think more than one step ahead. This why I believe most dumb decisions are voted for. One immigrant was bad? Lets ban all immigrants. One criminal slipped the police? Lets allow spying on his chat and catch him. Etc.
I agree, the ghost of Stalin is right behind the curtain waiting for a 2nd, 3rd, 4th chance at making it work ("oh, no but this time we will REALLY get it right and eliminate only all the REAL enemies of the people")
It's like surveillance logic eats itself in the end. What really gets me is how often these proposals skip over the part where we ask whether they actually work
There is a different problem at play behind this.
There are strong lobbying efforts that want this tech/system, for their own reasons which are not being advocated to the public.
At the same time, the lobbying forces behind this are pushing a random assortment of "popular" reasons to implement it - "think of the children/vegetables/climate".
All this crap is not being driven by grassroots movements. To the extent those are involved, they are being manipulated and sheepherded.
A lot of politics, if not all of it, are driven by real reasons separated from the methods used to push it through. See Brexit, MAGA, and a lot of other crap :-/.
As happens in other countries, I see the politicians in my own country implementing a lot of random policies that have no popular support, but is quite relevant to some inner circle and network of policitians and their friends.
Protecting children is critically important, but turning every citizen into a potential suspect by default? That's not justice, that’s just lazy policy design. Honestly, this feels like one of those rare moments where political pressure and public backlash actually worked...
From first person experience, once a society creates a surveillance state, to protect whatever, an inevitable avalanche starts.
A new game will emerge in which the best players are the ones who excel at finding secrets of others and use them as leverage. We had a president on national TV threating a challenging candidate that he will reveal their secrets... Think about that for a moment and you'll find so many wrong things that this implicitly admits to.
The disease was a blessing compared to the complications of the cure.
what people dont get about mass surveilance is that big systeme are easy corrupted. for example if I want privat data about peoplw from police or assurance or state office there is a way to get them with money and connections.
So if mass surveilance is
implemented it would be missused for personal benefit of whoever has the money and the possibility
I was flagged (bizarrely) because I was asking for help in propagating another website like this for similar ends. Joachim however reached out to me. he's working on an open-source model of his website.
33 comments
[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 65.7 ms ] threadDoesn't sound like it is over yet - only delayed.
[1] https://www.heise.de/en/news/Denmark-surprisingly-abandons-p...
So we are to believe Hummelgaard wants to protect children by enabling vast surveillance, so all the bad offenders out there can get ... 4 months in prison.
Its not really adding up. And he still hasn't presented any argument for the thing except that you are pro child abuse if you don't agree with him. I'm at the point where I hope he's corrupt and its not just all about power for him.
https://www.borgerforslag.dk/se-og-stoet-forslag/?Id=FT-2115...
https://www.ft.dk/da/aktuelt/nyheder/2025/09/borgerforslag-n...
Give it another 10 years the way things are going, and I'm sure it will be back.
As though it would 1) be a practical possibility and 2) be effective.
Compounding the issue is that the more technology can solve #1, the more these people fixate on it as the solution without regards to the lack of #2.
I wish there were a way, once and for all, to prevent this ridiculous idea from taking hold over and over again. If I could get a hold of such people when these ideas were in their infancy… perhaps I should monitor everything everyone does and watch for people considering the same as a solution to their problem… ah well, no, still don’t see how that follows logically as a reasonable solution.
People refuse to think ahead, or simply can't.
Danes trust their state - for good reason. But this is obviously taking it too far.
Its not that Peter Hummelgaard is trying to create a spy state. He just doesn’t understand tech.
Simple as that.
A new game will emerge in which the best players are the ones who excel at finding secrets of others and use them as leverage. We had a president on national TV threating a challenging candidate that he will reveal their secrets... Think about that for a moment and you'll find so many wrong things that this implicitly admits to.
The disease was a blessing compared to the complications of the cure.
Nations like to hope things won't happen to them.
So if mass surveilance is implemented it would be missused for personal benefit of whoever has the money and the possibility