this post was submitted on 20 Jun 2024
18 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

58937 readers
3476 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
 

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”.

top 32 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] arymandias@feddit.de 6 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

They are just edging this bill till nobody pays attention. Democracy at work!

[–] LordCrom@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago (2 children)

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....

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Don't be surprise if it reappears as an attachment to a fishing quota law or a law defining sizes for underwear...

[–] uis@lemm.ee 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

it reappears as an attachment to a fishing quota law or a law defining sizes for underwear

Sounds very Putin.

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 1 points 4 months ago

Yeah, Putin doesn't have to hide anything because nobody is allowed to object to any crazy laws he invents.

[–] match@pawb.social -1 points 4 months ago (2 children)

It happens in the US yes, but does it happen in the EU?

[–] d00ery@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

As much I like the EU, politicians are politicians ...

[–] henfredemars@infosec.pub 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)
[–] d00ery@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Gosh that was a quick year! Thanks 😁

[–] uis@lemm.ee 1 points 4 months ago

Cupcake! So sweet and tasty.

Cupcake! Don't be too hasty.

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.

[–] dojan@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] wewbull@feddit.uk 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Don't make the mistake of thinking that left mean anti-authoritarian. Left or right is an economic stance, and is orthogonal to beliefs surrounding government rights Vs population rights.

[–] QuantumSoul@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Not exactly orthogonal, left right could be viewed as an Principal Component Analysis reduced to only one axis. So there are correlations between stances but so much dimensions lost that it's nearly useless

[–] wewbull@feddit.uk 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Two dimensions is 100% better than one.

[–] Lifter@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

That's not true at all, mathematically. That's why we have a measurement for co-variance or correlation. If two dimensions are 100 correlation, they can most definitely be reduced to one.

[–] wewbull@feddit.uk 1 points 4 months ago

...but they're not in 100 percent correlation in this case, and you're naive if you think they are .

[–] MigratingtoLemmy@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

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?

[–] andrade@infosec.pub 1 points 4 months ago

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.

[–] MonkderDritte@feddit.de 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Can we please identify the guys always pushing encryption-breaking ideas?

[–] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

And hack their phones so we can see why they want to spy on everyone else's phones

[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] uis@lemm.ee 1 points 4 months ago

In Russia one of biggest proponent of anti-privacy laws is Milonov, which looks like pedophile ans rumored to be gay.

[–] foremanguy92_@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 months ago

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.

[–] shortwavesurfer@monero.town 0 points 4 months ago (2 children)

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.

[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

They will keep trying again and again and again. The assault on privacy has been going on for decades and it will never stop.

[–] Dasnap@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

You've gotta defend for an infinite amount of time, but they've only gotta succeed once.

[–] ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.de 0 points 4 months ago

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.

[–] MonkderDritte@feddit.de 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Better define some basic human rights as a core tenet and fire repeat offenders, because they are a danger to the population.

[–] MonkderDritte@feddit.de 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Until next try in a few months.

What i read here sometime without source, that secret services since Snowden push for breaking of encryption, seems more and more plausible.