this post was submitted on 04 Jun 2024
402 points (97.2% liked)

Technology

59055 readers
3173 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
402
EU approval for chat control (www.patrick-breyer.de)
submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
 

We need to do something against this. The EU plans to apply a law for a chat control in the territory. The approval say that all the chats and the emails would be send to the government to do AI scanning to in fact “find the children abuses”, even when using apps with end-to-end encryption (the EU will ask the services to open their secrets keys… we know that Microsoft, Google and Facebook have already agreed to this. On the other hand Signal for example had said that they would leave the EU if this law will be applied). We need to counter this, because this restrict the privacy and the security of the citizens. Even if you’re not living in the EU, you should take a look because that could encourage others to do the same! Please take a look of the situation and make you your own idea of the case. Find out here the votes results for now, by countries and more... mepwatch.eu

Some others organizations criticized the approval, a open letter/petition was posted here : globalencryption.org

PS : I know that this was posted on the community a bit before (https://lemmy.world/post/16093632) but I think this is really important and the people should know it. That's a really regrettable decision for the population. thx

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 25 points 5 months ago (1 children)

If this law passes I will delete What's App. I don't fucking care how many contacts I will loose. Matrix it is then.

[–] [email protected] 34 points 5 months ago (2 children)

You know even without the law should consider deleting whatsapp and switched to signal or other private stuff

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Yes, I try to avoid it, but its kinda ass, if you loose contact to literally everyone you know.

I already use Signal and matrix for certain groups and contacts.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

I can understand I've gone trough that as well, but you know it's so much safer to use a more private messaging app, as example we suspect the Israeliens to use AI and WhatsApp to organize murders to suspected pro Palestinians people, based on their groups on whatsapp...

[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

I would prefer Matrix or XMPP, they don't have the risks regarding centralization and are thus far harder to censor.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 months ago (2 children)

For sure these are better for a more private and can avoid censorship far more easily, you can use Session as well, but the of Signal is really good because of their solid proved encryption. Snowden and others recommend it. Maybe not the absolute best but far away from the worst

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago

Signal is also great because it is easy to use, and works on all mobile platforms. It's probably the easiest secure chat app to get people onboard with using.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Major XMPP clients now have implemented OMEMO - from what I understand, it's very similar.

My issue with Signal, aside from centralization and phone numbers, is how it is annoying to use without a smartphone.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Doesn’t need phone numbers anymore

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

First - it does still require one for registration, just no longer requires it to be public. Second - this still has nothing to do with the fact that desktop doesn't allow registration and tells you to register from a smartphone instead.

[–] [email protected] 87 points 5 months ago (2 children)

As most child abuse happens in the homes by the parents or relatives, when can we expect 24/7 surveilance in our homes?

Oh wait its not about protecting children, is it?

[–] [email protected] 15 points 5 months ago

They say that it's about to protect children but that ask a big question for our privacy

[–] [email protected] 26 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I'm worried too but I doubt countries who voted against it will just lie down and turn over. I'm sure local courts will fight this on the grounds of national privacy laws. And just because the EU wishes this to be a thing doesn't mean it's happening too. The technological groundwork needs to be developed for this and I can imagine that some service will drag their feet at implementing that. At least that's my unicorn utopia with rainbows I currently live in to bear this reality 🫠

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

The EU will already have projects in development as far as my experience goes.

What I do not know though but think applies: Such an act is legally binding for all member states. If they fight these things, they are allowed to propose at the EU court for adjustment in order to be aligned with the national law. This can postpone the national implementation for a few years.

But it can only be revoked by a new act of the EU council.

And they can simply ignore any new suggestion of the EU parliament if they like to.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 5 months ago (5 children)

Results of last voting, so you know who not to choose on Sunday:

https://mepwatch.eu/9/vote.html?v=167712

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

At least it reinforced my preferred party...

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Isn’t that the vote for chat control 1.0?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

if I'm reading this correctly, it's from April 2024, which was after the previous version was rejected.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

Isn’t it to vote to renew chat control 1.0?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Yea, I mean the vote to renew chat control 1.0

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

In that case, I'm not sure

[–] [email protected] 15 points 5 months ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

In Poland it's not great either... But I'm positively surprised that 3 guys from PiS voted against it. That gives us 4 to 41. Not great, as I said before...

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago

Maybe try getting an MEP for Greens/EFA or the Left?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

80% for, as in "in favour of scanning", or am I misinterpreting something?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago

No, I think that's corrext because our conservative CDU/CSU party voted in favor and we all know how those ultra-conservative christians vote.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I'm relieved that the group I wanted to vote was against. I'm frightened that it was the only one against in France 😱

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

Which group in France is against? I consider making this issue a top priority for choosing who I vote for.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 5 months ago (1 children)

So here in the states, teens who are romantically active sometimes sext each other (sometimes even as an alternative to actual sex). But law enforcement is very fond of regarding it as CSAM, even to the point of convicting teenagers of distribution. Of all fifty states, only Maine has carved out a defense for teen couples utilizing their phone cameras in a way that is ragingly common among adults.

All fifty states have Romeo and Juliet laws so they recognize that teens sometimes have sex. But as it is, they're not allowed to sext. (also R+J laws often don't apply to same-sex couples).

So I'm all curious how the EU plans to tackle this revelation

[–] [email protected] 12 points 5 months ago (1 children)

So I'm all curious how the EU plans to tackle this revelation

They do not. At all.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago

So as per the rest of western cultures, they freak out and abuse teens when they engage in normal sexual activity? Do they imprison them the way they do here?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago

i put my real name, the eu would be surprised.

load more comments
view more: next ›