If u make privacy illegal then only criminals will have privacy.
If u make privacy illegal then only cops, spooks, governments, billionaires and other criminals will have privacy. FTFY.
I already have a chainsaw for that kind of thing, that does this have to do with guns and encryption?
What? You think criminals donโt have guns in yours?
By the way, a country canโt believe anything, itโs an artificial concept on a map.
Uhh have you heard? Constitutional rights are ala cart now! Just pick and choose what you want! No big deal.
Iโve always been reluctant to rely on papers like any constitution as a base for my perceived rights.
Maybe as an argument, in the sense of โsmart people have said that it should be and made some points in its favorโ.
But in general itโs a horrid mistake to rely on a paper. Some people you havenโt given any consent will stamp a few saying that you are a slave and oops.
The reality is that thereโs no way to consistently defend a right suppressed by legal arguments. If you can check the chain of laws giving you some right or taking it, youโll always come to the point where itโs just โwe all decide thatโs lawโ and you were not part of that decision. And if you go the opposite way and just accept whatโs made law, then you are dropping the idea of rights in its entirety, making decisions made by someone else a law for you.
My point is that this is unsolvable and one canโt replace good and evil with legal arguments. Laws will never be sufficiently good for that, even constitutional laws.
So Iโm for right to arm oneself, but I donโt think thereโs any magic allowing to universally prove that a thing is legally right or wrong.
Which is why, again, a journalism which isnโt outrageous is just public relations, a protest that doesnโt harm economy and break laws is just a demonstration, an a principle which can be overridden by a law or a threat of force is just virtue signalling.
And on Tuesday, 37 Members of Parliament signed an open letter to the Council of Europe urging legislators to reject Chat Control.
โWe explicitly warn that the obligation to systematically scan encrypted communication, whether called โupload-moderationโ or โclient-side scanning,โ would not only break secure end-to-end encryption, but will to a high probability also not withstand the case law of the European Court of Justice,โ the MEPs said. โRather, such an attack would be in complete contrast to the European commitment to secure communication and digital privacy, as well as human rights in the digital space.โ
I hope to fuck this shit wonโt get passed
Regardless of the supposed motivations, this is mass surveillance on a scale never seen before. The EU wants to become China 2.0.
Why the need to compare to China though? People can understand that mass surveillance is bad without resorting to โChina badโ. Go ask Snowdon if China is the mother of all surveillance.
"Bruh why would you compare them to the largest surveillance state in the world bro. Saying how the EU would be more like the the most widely-known example of government surveillance and blocking of Internet traffic is just saying China bad, bro.
inb4 โbUt mUriCa bAd ToOโ
Idk why communists defend Chinaโs every move. Communism can be defended without excusing Chinaโs authoritarian practices. I have Chinese friends living in China who tell me all kinds of horrific stories that theyโve had to deal with because of Chinaโs mass surveillance (and more). That isnโt western propaganda, thatโs peopleโs lived experiences. There is literally a โGreat Firewall of Chinaโ lmao. China IS bad when it comes to their mass surveillance and suppression of speech. USA IS bad when it comes to their letting giant corporations have such free rein that it makes us all into serfs. Why compare to China? Because China is a great comparison.
How am I defending china? I just donโt see the need to go โoh look like X countryโ whenever the EU or the US do something bad. Weโre plenty bad ourselves
As someone who doesnโt know much about China aside from the high competitiveness of their academic environment, Iโm curious as to what sort of issues your friends face due to surveillance? Does it affect their day to day lives? Or does it just foster an atmosphere of โbe careful what you sayโ?
China is bad. It is a brutal dictatorship in the middle of committing 2 genocides. Uyghurs and Falun Gong.
Itโs highly likely that these laws will be passed because more people are voting for right wing leaders in EU, Right wing heavily supports this. If EU sets the example soon the whole world will follow.
they call themselves โright wingโ, but they arent. See here in orbanistan (hungary) orban and all his comrades were commie state party functionals, or were at least the part in the commie youth organization. Also they vote down 23 times (as of now) the disclosure of the commie state party agent files, serving commie dictatorships like PRC, and the soviet union mourner putin, etc. Just like AFD in germany, etcโฆ
I canโt take anyone who says โcommieโ seriously. Itโs like hearing an adult say they need to go potty.
If itโs client side then pedos will just strip it out and keep on going. Itโs a giant waste of time.
Itโs nothing to do with stopping pedos. The people pushing this year-in and year-out donโt care THAT much about pedos. Itโs not a cause thatโs motivating enough for them to be putting in so much effort, trying to sneak in legislation after being repeatedly rebuffed.
The real people pushing this are lobbyists working for the companies that sell the monitoring software.
And for anyone wondering btw, this is actually a proven fact and not just a guess.
This article in german talks about the connections that the people pushing this have to the relevant tech industry companies.
Itโs rather โtell me whoโs your friend and Iโll tell you who you areโ, most of specific people involved in pushing this have a history with authoritarian regimes, some genocidal.
Many things may change overnight.
Itโs not a cause thatโs motivating enough for them to be putting in so much effort, trying to sneak in legislation after being repeatedly rebuffed.
Until those trying are in jail explaining their motivations in detail, this wonโt stop.
Itโs really all about having a way to get past encryption so they can spy on everyone indiscriminately. Itโs pushed that itโs to save kids and unmask pedos, but the people in charge know the pedophiles are their rich donors.
Itโs about controlling opposition and making sure the wealthy can stay on top. Imagine if no small business can hide their information from their competitors.
Or, you know, trivially circumvent it? Compress media, break up URLs? I donโt understand how this could possibly be effective.
Any circumvention argument misses the point.
90% of people wonโt. The remaining 10% will be flagged and can be scrutinized more manually (without any violence which will get into news). Itโs the way any surveillance works. Which is why non-backdoored e2e encryption for everyone in everything everywhere and death of centralized services are important to fight surveillance.
Itโs like flowers covering body parts on photos, we kinda guess whatโs there. If the whole photo is covered with flowers, thatโs another story.
Wait till they make TOR illegal and force people to mask TOR traffic to look like HTTPS. Then produce a stream of rubbish alongside said HTTPS traffic so as to fool authorities. Lol at them thinking non-profit tech gurus are going to give them cake
