The EU still wants to scan your private messages and photos (opens in new tab)

It's really surprising to me that this issue keeps coming up time and time again, until I realised that it's non-voted in parties actually trying to pass this stuff!

I didn't realise that the EU parliament simply says yes or no to bills and doesn't actually propose new laws, whilst the EU Commission are appointed and decide on what bills to push through.

Why? Why has your approach not been toward passing active legislation that protects these rights going forward? Genuinely curious. I understand that finding and pressing the “don’t ask again” button is always harder, but I don’t understand why “we punted on this decision!” is a celebratory moment.

The story is tragically illustrative of the maxim that you can oppose terrible legislation a hundred times but they only have to pass it once.

>rejected

>let's vote on it again!

Is it still a democracy if you just keep redoing the vote until you get the outcome you want? The politicians involved in this should be ashamed of themselves.

"Article 7

Respect for private and family life

Everyone has the right to respect for his or her private and family life, home and communications.

Article 8

Protection of personal data

1. Everyone has the right to the protection of personal data concerning him or her.

2. Such data must be processed fairly for specified purposes and on the basis of the consent of the person concerned or some other legitimate basis laid down by law. Everyone has the right of access to data which has been collected concerning him or her, and the right to have it rectified.

3. Compliance with these rules shall be subject to control by an independent authority."

The reality is that they'll just keep pushing it from different angles, they only have to get lucky once, we (or EU citizens, we left and have our own issues) need to be lucky every time - much like an adverserial relationship where you are on the defending side from a cyberattack...funny that really.

Because the people voting it down are the elected MEPs, whilst the people putting it up to parliament are the European Commission. The EC are appointed, rather than elected. Which means the powers that be just appoint people who are going to push through laws like this, that they want. The MEPs can't put up bills to be voted on.

Article 7, EU Charter of Fundamental Rights: Respect for private and family life (and probably a couple other sections in there as well).

The problem is national security exceptions. Chat control and other similar bills are trying to carve out exceptions to privacy laws under the excuse of national security.

Also its politically cheap to introduce surveillance or to expand state power, it's comparatively extremely difficult to pass laws that specifically restrict state power.

Privacy laws are well and good, but they exist. The problem is we need to stop allowing "public safety" or "national security" to be a trump card that allows exceptions to said laws, and good luck getting any government to ever agree that privacy is more important than national security.

- The GDPR

- The ePrivacy directive, which is explicitly derogated (sabotaged) by chat control 1.0

Note that the amendment was already amended on 11th March to set expiry to Aug 2027 and to also exclude E2E communications.

While it's still worth fighting, it is less worrying

The question of course is, why something is allowed multiple votes (and the basic answer is - if it presented some changed - but I don't know if it's the case)

But if you are a US citizen, I would refrain talking about increased control of life outside of your own turf. Your education system is controlled either government or religious groups. Your streets are patrolled by uneducated police troops without control and they are detaining even US citizens without due process. Now your government says they will block all foreign made routers. And did you forget NSA Prism program? Your voting system is controlled via gerrymandered maps which are changing constantly depending who's in the control. Lots of your citizens are living paycheck to paycheck and one health issue can bankrupt them and only way to survive is to ask money from strangers via gofundme. All because of healthcare and insurance companies greed and politicians lack of interests of their constituents.

Yeah, the EU legislation about privacy and chat control is problematic but saying that US is doing so much better for it's citizens is a stretch.

https://digitalcourage.social/@echo_pbreyer/1162053712243153...

And I’d still take this clusterfuck over the alternative current state of the US. At least this situation we can (and have been) striking down, despite all the naysayers on HN. Here’s to hoping we’re able to do so again!

Yes, but who isn't? Not the other side of the pond for sure.

We've shot it down before, and we'll shoot it down again, regardless of how relentless Palantir lobbying gets.

I realise the EU is our only hope to defend ourselves against big players like China and the US and smaller bullies like Russia.

But at the same time I realise the EU we have in this timeline is one of the worst possible: a criminal venture, a safe heaven for the corrupt elite + their lobbyists and an organisation that‘s hell bent on harming and controlling its citizens.

Majorities for sane parties are not possible. Democracy is too slow, too indirect. Hell, this is barely a democracy at all, just like on the national level. As EU citizens we as powerless as every other citizen in the world.

It takes only one win to remove our rights but once they’re gone you’ll never get them back.

    while not pass:
        try to pass something stupid, malevolent or that hurts people and democracies

Either way those elected to supposedly serve are the only ones winning.

“We decide something, then put it out there and wait for a while to see what happens.

If there is then no great outcry and no uprisings, because most people do not even understand what has been decided, then we continue—step by step, until there is no turning back.”

— Jean-Claude Juncker

That's the key question!

There's a small group of very powerful people that keep pushing this agenda.

Who are those people?

Find out.

Publicize their names. Make their corruption visible and linked to their identity.

In case anyone has an issue with this: Remember! This is what they want! For you! Not for them. Only the plebs.

There is a long chain of actions that ends with you having e2e on your phone (or what not). At the starts of it there is your physical body living in jurisdiction and transacting with (mostly) other people being somewhat present in the same jurisdiction using government-captured money. There are multiply choke points, controlling which will not result in 100% enforcement, but will make whatever you want to do a huge pain in the ass, so most people will not bother (case in point -- jailbraking). Whoever is left self-selects themselves for selective enforcement.

It won't all be non-Europeans if that's what you're implying

God I love politics

Let's all take this person extremely seriously, as they are advocating for free speech.

Hey, let's call this "forum control" :)

So they feel they must turn to the state for protection.

Second. Who gave you the right to define antieuropean union propaganda as a sin.

Some people may hate it, some people may love it, other want to change it.

It was created by vote, surely it can be whatever the fuck the way the people want by vote.

So, in my view this is not really a "left" or "right" thing, but something that is pushed by people you could call "the establishment".

For various, and unclear, reasons, there is substantial backing to change this.

>2. This Regulation does not apply to the processing of personal data:

>by competent authorities for the purposes of the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, including the safeguarding against and the prevention of threats to public security.