- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
Moritz Körner, Member of the European Parliament, disclosed the decision on Twitter. Swedish publisher SVG said, “The question was removed at the last moment from Thursday’s ambassadorial meeting in Brussels”.
You must log in or register to comment.
They are just edging this bill till nobody pays attention. Democracy at work!
Indeed, until the next time, where it doesn’t have enough news coverage. China 2.0 here we come.
I’m still fucking mad the Left voted yes for this. Campaigning on a no and then turning their coats immediately after the elections. Disgraceful, and I hope whichever party members are responsible get booted.
They are just delaying the vote for another time… Hoping that next time it will fly under the radar and there won’t be a huge backlash of discontent.
If the vote fail, they just wait a year, rename it, and try again.
Same thing happens in the US. Law proposed that people hate, people organize, start a campaign that fights for news airtime, bringing awareness of the dickery about to happen, and then succeed after a hard battle and many many volunteer hours spent.
In 6 months Congress just renames it the “I love kittens” act and sticks it on a must pass bill.
Fighting bullshit laws is exhausting…
Don’t be surprise if it reappears as an attachment to a fishing quota law or a law defining sizes for underwear…
it reappears as an attachment to a fishing quota law or a law defining sizes for underwear
Sounds very Putin.
Actually, this is a common occurance in the US and EU. One of the previous, court-captured laws actually was riding with fishing quota regulations.
Yeah, Putin doesn’t have to hide anything because nobody is allowed to object to any crazy laws he invents.
It happens in the US yes, but does it happen in the EU?
Idk about the EU(there have been cases that were exactly this, an example would be Article 13), but I can say to you, that this devinetively happens in Germany. Our conservatives party wants to pass a law, that would track and save all your online activity(Vorratsdatenspeicherung/ data preservation) to fight “paedophiles and terrorists” they bring it up once in a while, even tho, our federal court already said, that its illegal.
As much I like the EU, politicians are politicians …
Happy cake day!
Gosh that was a quick year! Thanks 😁
Cupcake! So sweet and tasty.
Cupcake! Don’t be too hasty.
This was exported to Australia from US by NRA.
Hungary will take the EU presidency, they just name it “child protection” and will smear everyone as a pedophile who objects it.
Wasn’t this rejected once already? Perhaps if they wanted to do something useful, they should pass something that says that if something is majority disliked twice or something, then it should be withdrawn and not proposed again for at least 100 years.
They will keep trying again and again and again. The assault on privacy has been going on for decades and it will never stop.
You’ve gotta defend for an infinite amount of time, but they’ve only gotta succeed once.
Yep, and as I pointed out in another comment in this thread, Chat Control isn’t the only piece of legislation like this that’s in the works.
Considering that the extreme right just won big, I have no doubt that one of these fascist surveillance packages will go through. Yeah, at first it may be used for catching criminals, until it isn’t
Nono, it will always only be used to catch criminals, that won’t change…it’s what makes someone a criminal that changes.
Ha, fuckin’ touché
Actually it was the Left wing that mainly voted yes for this. Just saying.
Source? In Germany at least that’s not the case, it’s mainly the conservatives who push for it. In the original vote, only the greens clearly opposed it. Later on, SPD (center-left) and FDP (liberal) changed course to also oppose it. Couldn’t find results for other countries though, so I’m genuinely curious.
I did found: https://www.patrick-breyer.de/en/posts/chat-control/ All the red countries where in favor actually. Yellow were in research. Green is opposed.
here is the document itself: https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-11316-2024-INIT/fr/pdf#page=4
Doesn’t change who’s in charge now
I believe all parties in EU are not really understanding technology in general. So I think it’s a very bad decision to give these people power over these kinds of rules. They just have no idea what they are doing frankly.
Yep, no disagreement there. This sort of mass surveillance is a fucking terrible idea no matter who’s behind the wheel
I believe all parties in EU are not really understanding technology in general.
There are pirates. Well, after last elections it seems to be the pirate. Only one.
Considering that the extreme right just won big
Someone won big yachts from Putin.
Yes. Technically, a similar vote could repeal the law just as easily but there is a history of governments not giving their power away easily; implementing it also sets a precedent and creates technical enforcement options for other governments willing to go through with something similar in the future, or for hackers to exploit because gov-rooted devices will remain in operation for years after the potential repeal.
And “Chat Control” isn’t even the only thing like this in the pipeline. There’s the so-called “security by design” bullshit (which does the opposite of what then name implies) that’s actually even worse than Chat Control and has also been worked on in secret, and which’d include mass scale surveillance of not just photos but pretty much everything, and is much more likely to pass than Chat Control.
2001 especially.
Such a rule is basically un-enforceable. Because it is nearly never exactly the same text. So it is always the first time voted on.
What they could do is create a law that protects the integrity of E2EE. At least in this case.
But I guess that will never happen… Well, a girl can dream.
It was protected by the ECHR in a recent ruling. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2024/03/european-court-human-rights-confirms-undermining-encryption-violates-fundamental
However, Chat Control 2.0 argues that since the spying is done before the content is encrypted, it’s somehow ok. 🙄
It seems ECHR is best court. They fuck Putin, they fuck mass surveilance.
Or law that forbids any mass surveilance. By any entity.
Either way they can just give it a new name and change some details to propose it again. Like how they made it “voluntary” this time (but you can only send text if you don’t agree).
Better define some basic human rights as a core tenet and fire repeat offenders, because they are a danger to the population.
Find the politicians by name who voted yes for this, and display them in public.
Let the capable open source community then take over going through their phones, since they must be OK with their phones being scanned, right?
At least some of them were discussion giving themselves an exception from it. So no.
All the more reason to find the friendly neighbourhood blackhat gang
more reason to find the friendly neighbourhood blackhat gang
Hah. Now imagine someone calling China to hack their phones.
*wink wink
Winking would be more appropriate if it was Russiя.
What would the Chinese like then?
Hahahaha. Dunno. +50 social rating, bowl of rice and catgirl?
First of all it was in the council, so not really individual politicians but the governments/ministers of member countries, and second they didn’t vote, it was withdrawn.
We got lucky this time. Won’t be the case next time.
Also, even if it’s entire governments voting, there must be a way to find politicians who are pro and against this, yes? Pretty sure governments had an internal vote and they came up with their decision based on said vote
I’d assume people already know who their government is and who of them favours policies like this.
Note the vote was withdrawn, not actually voted against. They’re pushing this for a later date because there was no majority.
“The EU Council did not make a decision on chat control today, as the agenda item was removed due to the lack of a majority, (…)
Belgium’s draft law, (…) was instead postponed indefinitely. (…) Belgium cannot currently present a proposal that would gain a majority. In July, the Council Presidency will transfer from Belgium to Hungary, which has stated its intention to advance negotiations on chat control as part of its work program.
Can we please identify the guys always pushing encryption-breaking ideas?
And hack their phones so we can see why they want to spy on everyone else’s phones
I have zero doubt that many core proponents of anti-privacy laws are pedophiles — that’s why they always add measures to ensure it’s illegal to invade their own privacy.
In Russia one of biggest proponent of anti-privacy laws is Milonov, which looks like pedophile ans rumored to be gay.
It’s quite possible that they are simply doing all their stuff the old-fashioned way - talking in person with electronics off, exchanging paper notes and burning them, something like that.
I hate dishonest titles and URLs. In reality, this shit has nothing to do with “child sex content.”
So I assume that since it was withdrawn, this doesn’t set a precedent and it’s only a matter of time untill they try to sneak it thru with a different name.
Now put in a law saying you can’t do that
Nice. I guess they didn’t expect to get a majority to support it anymore. Definitely a win for now, but I’m sure they’ll try again.
I guess that realisation came after Germany said they will vote “No”
deleted by creator
Damn… this was almost China 2.0 in EU. This was a close call people… this is not good.
Lets gooooo🔥
(It has happened in the past, it will probably happen again in a few months, but still, its a win!)
Thank the heavens. Now keep it that way!
Great choice, now do not say the same thing next year!
I am suspicious they realized that they weren’t going to be able to make a loophole for themselves - I’ve seen several articles in the last week on how they were trying to do that.
Nah it’s more like that got caught being hypocrites
Anti-privacy doesn’t see hypocrisity as something bad