- cross-posted to:
- privacy@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- privacy@lemmy.world
Chat Control didnt pass - they didnt even vote because they were afraid the result would be embarassing.
And we got told so many times, that EU now wants Chat Control. But it was a big fat lie.
EU is a democracy with different opinions, and when a small group of facists tries to read your chats, it does not represent the EU opinion.
But the whole media got you thinking so. Proving even on Lemmy, you and me are extremly prone to propaganda.
I quoted the article here with the news:
In a major breakthrough for the digital rights movement, the German government has refused to back the EU’s controversial Chat Control regulation yesterday after facing massive public pressure.
The government did not take a position on the proposal.
This blocks the required majority in the EU Council, derailing the plan to pass the surveillance law next week.
You must log in or # to comment.
Is this some sort of misguided patriotism? I don’t see what the propaganda we are supposedly falling for is. Is it not as equally accurate to say that public opinion and outcry led to it not coming to a vote? I think keeping that public outcry is important to defeat future attempts to undermine rights. Don’t think it can’t happen in the EU. It’s happening if the US
People here are very groupthink.
When Tesla was at like 250 in the stock market just six months ago, I said that the stock will recover very soon. But the groupthink here was totally agreeing with eachother that Tesla is gone forever, and people kept posting Elon doing nazi gestures and saying they are done.
Now, the stock is over 400. But no posts is made about that and how maybe the groupthink was completely wrong. Instead the next thing is ongoing.
We have evidence around us all the time how the group is completely wrong in their assumptions. Majority opinion is not right by default.
What kind of nonsense is this writeup? Media “got to me”? Look, you see Denmark? You see how it’s in support of chat control?
Yeah, that’s my country. So it’s a rather serious issue here.
Jesus Christ, you think this will be the last attempt?
The fact that these guys even proposed (and more than once) something that so profoundly violates the fundamental right to privacy of European citizens is cause for great alarm.
OP’s post seems like propaganda to me and of the lazy kind.
Maybe I don’t understand, but the fact there is a vote for it (or even just talk about it) is enough for me to warrant everyones immediate action.
I’m glad the media got this to our attention asap, because we were able to react quickly (and stop this… hopefully its stopped and wont continue or come back).
Edit: commented then read others, think ppl agree with this and they say it better than I have.
“let your motto be ‘eternal vigilance is the price we pay for liberty.’”
Freedom dies in the silence of the many at the hands of the few. We must always be adamant with opposition, because it’s hard to undo what has been done. The easiest way to put the genie back in the bottle is never letting it out in the first place.
Oh no lemmy is a reactionary craphole that despises nuanced discussion? Well atleast it’s a place to call people facists.
This is a terrible map, lumping neutral and opposed together? I am against chat control but ffs we don’t need more misleading media with the internet already dying under waves of automated misinformation
Agreed
If that graphic is accurate, the media didn’t “get” anyone. Seems some countries are actually gun-ho with the elimination of privacy, and its a movement that doesn’t die with one failed vote.
Y’all are getting too fucking comfortable. Authoritarianism is always around the corner, even when things feel safe.
The biggest problem with democracy is it demands a level of vigilance most people are not capable of. Because it is expressly unnatural. Human nature is to gravitate to power and authority
What a retarded blog post.
Let’s not protest terrible ideas to not embarrass facists (who may or may not be part of your/our government) or what’s supposed to be the message here?
The message here is: “don’t believe when people start screaming that the EU is a fascist organisation that wants to subjugate the population”.
Because there was A LOT of that online when Chat Control reared its head.
Have you read the sources you posted?
Negotiations will now begin between the Parliament, the Council of the EU, which represents national governments, and the European Commission to determine the final shape of the law.
Nobody is mandating anything - yet.
Sure, it might end up like that, but - to date - the Commission has been rather sensible when it comes to such things. They also have the example of UK that shows that the law works against its intentions by driving people towards unregulated and more dangerous websites.
We’ll see how it goes.
That’s simply how any EU directive works: EU decides what must happen, and it’s up to the individual countries to put it into their respective laws.
That way people get angry at their federal government instead. Who can point their finger higher up. Who can then point to the countries specific implementation in their turn. It’s a neat trick. Nobody’s responsible for anything.
the law works against its intentions
When has that ever stopped a puritan?
EU decides what must happen, and it’s up to the individual countries to put it into their respective laws.
Wow, it’s so weird that the article you linked lied, then!
No, it’s saying that exact thing: online users of porn must be deanonymised on penalty of prison. To stop child abuse because that’s related somehow?
It’s just that the countries themselves must choose the particulates: who will do the deanonymisation, in what way, what will enforcement look like, etc.
That’s what they mean with “the final shape of the law hasn’t been determined yet”.
Every EU directive works that way: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directive_(European_Union)
A directive is a legal act of the European Union[1] that requires member states to achieve particular goals without dictating how the member states achieve those goals
In this case: the de-anonymisation must happen. Up to the respective countries to do the dirty work.
Are you reading your own sources…?
A directive is a legal act of the European Union that requires member states to achieve particular goals without dictating how the member states achieve those goals
Considering (another quote from your own sources):
Negotiations will now begin between the Parliament, the Council of the EU, which represents national governments, and the European Commission to determine the final shape of the law
They might as well look at the UK, and go “OK, lets have the user click that they pinky promise they’re 18”.
The difference between a fascist government and a democratic government can be distressingly thin, something we should all be aware of by now.
In this case, the EU has just proven it is currently on the right side of that divide. When extremely unpopular and authoritarian ideas were considered, the public felt able to voice their disapproval and the government felt they had to listen. That is a crucial step. Good for you all.
Sadly it likely will continue to require major work to keep the public on guard against future attempts like this one, but that’s life.
There’s no media about the EU in USA. Nobody gives a crap. The “news” is all just fascist propaganda about how genocide is good and windmills cause tornados.
Wait, have people been setting their windmills to the tornado mode? I always thought it odd to have that setting.
Why in the world would this be talking about the USA?
Troll post. Not falling for it. Bye.
the fuck kind of dumbass bullshit tankie take is this?
“Because there was push back and the EU decided to not go forward with a vote and be embarrassed, that means they never really wanted it at all” is one of the dumbest takes I’ve heard in a minute.
Can’t someone pick the shitty parts of this proposal and push it to a vote, so it can be struck down already?
