The Dastardly Danes and Ursula are at it again.
Chat Control is back & we've got only a few weeks to stop the EU CSAM scanning plans.
https://tuta.com/blog/chat-control-criticism
https://tuta.com/blog/chat-control-criticism
The Dastardly Danes and Ursula are at it again.
38 Comments
MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip · 69 pts · 320d
A more important question is, why they can endlessly propose laws that violate existing laws? They should lose the job, if they proposse two violations of laws or one violation of human rights, imo.
What with all the power but none of the responsibilities.
somerandomperson@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -7 pts · 320d
Which human right and laws?
unwarlikeExtortion@lemmy.ml · 41 pts · 320d
There's the EU-wide ePrivacy directive, explicitly stating (Art. 5):
There's also other EU-wide stuff, like:
Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (Art. 7):
European Convention on Human Rights (Art. 6):
Then there's the UN-wide Universal Declaration on Human Rights (Art. 12):
And as if that wasn't enough, most member states have confidentiality of communications codified in their constitutions. They are:
Belgium (Art. 29):
Bulgaria (Art. 34):
Croatia (Art. 36)*:
Cyprus (Art 17)*:
Czechia (Art. 13)*:
Denmark (Art. 72)*:
Estonia (Art. 43)*:
Finland (Sec. 10)*:
Germany (Art. 10)*:
Greece (Art. 19)*:
Hungary (Art. VI):
Italy (Art. 15)*:
Latvia (Art. 96):
Lithuania (Art. 22):
Malta (Art. 41):
Poland (Art. 49):
Portugal (Art. 34):
The Netherlands (Art. 13)*:
Austria, Luxembourg and France are outliers in that I didn't find anything in their constitutions during my brief little search.
GenkiFeral@lemmy.ml · 6 pts · 320d
well done!
baxster@sopuli.xyz · 28 pts · 320d
European Convention on Human Rights Article 8: Right to Respect for Private Life
Everyone has the right to respect for their private and family life, home and correspondence.
UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 16 (English)
"No child shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his or her privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his or her honour and reputation."
Zak@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 320d
Several EU countries have constitutional prohibitions of mass surveillance of private communication.
MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 319d
But why the downvotes? That's an important point the article didn't answer either.
20cello@lemmy.world · 39 pts · 320d
The problem here is that most of the people aren't aware of this happening 😕
ExcessShiv@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 23 pts · 320d
It's at least beginning to be mentioned in the national media where I live, and people are generally opposed. Unfortunately the current government seems to completely ignore the voice of the people.
MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip · 11 pts · 320d
So they don't represent the people, only their own interests. You should change them out as soon as possible.
Unquote0270@programming.dev · 16 pts · 320d
This assumes that elections are fair and not manipulated, and that money doesn't reach all sides, which isn't a given at this point.
birdwing@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 5 pts · 320d
Then we should also fiscally boycot them.
baxster@sopuli.xyz · 6 pts · 320d
In Sweden basically only have far left and far right that is opposing chat control.
GenkiFeral@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 320d
then the government must be bypassed in as many ways as possible.
sadfitzy@ttrpg.network · 1 pts · 317d
Yes. The people in control are being very smart about not drawing attention to this or the platforms it's supposed to be addressing.
ZinQ@lemmy.ml · 34 pts · 320d
By their own logic doesn't exempting themselves mean they want to abuse children?
dustyData@lemmy.world · 21 pts · 320d
Ok listen. That is the way governments want you to think in order to get away with erasing your right to privacy. It's the old "I have nothing to hide" argument.
But here's the thing. You have a butthole. I have a butthole. Everyone in the planet has a butthole. Having a butthole is nothing to be ashamed of, it is not a crime to have a butthole. No one will prosecute you for having a butthole. But that doesn't mean it is ok for the government to see everyone's butthole. That's your right to privacy.
If you want to protect children, you turn to social scientists to understand the problems and identify the ways in which to catch and prosecute offenders. Weaponizing surveillance on everyone in order to catch a very tiny percentage of population who might be committing a crime is hurting everyone.
Privacy is not about empowering pedos, it is about protecting everyone's rights. Erode one right and you erode all rights. Once the system is in place, then political surveillance to destroy democracy and install fascism is what follows.
Ironically, the global fascism is currently run by pedophiles.
unwarlikeExtortion@lemmy.ml · 11 pts · 320d
No. They want to protect themselves from... Their own security forces.
Yeah, checks out. Our little parlamentarians are all big pedos (at least the ones pushing for this shit).
sleen@lemmy.zip · 2 pts · 320d
vane@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 320d
One correction, they don't want to combat, they want to identify the sources so politicians can use it, because Epstein island is gone and they need new island.
NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 320d
It looks like your talking about CSAM! Please send details for your private event to 123 MPs house address. Should you fail to do so you will be arrested on CSAM charges.
Zerush@lemmy.ml · 10 pts · 320d
Cute cat photos are always the answer, or your favorite Reggeton music. The best encrypted message is when it not seems as such.
Formfiller@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 320d
EU will be where the US is soon if they don’t stop their own corrupt politicians and oligarch overreach
abbiistabbii@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 5 pts · 320d
Bold of you to assume they're not already.
NovaSel@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 320d
Again or still?
Blisterexe@lemmy.zip · 6 pts · 320d
still
harfang@slrpnk.net · 8 pts · 320d
Again ? Last talk wasn't 2 weeks ago ?
this@sh.itjust.works · 7 pts · 320d
I have a question, if I, an american, have an account with tuta mail, and this bs passes and is actually enforced, tuta would not be required to install the state spyware on my device as I'm not an EU citizen nor someone who resides in the EU, correct?
Auli@lemmy.ca · 7 pts · 320d
Why not if American companies have to follow American law internationally even if it goes against local law, why doesn't the other way apply.
Korkki@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 319d
Probably depends how the companies responsible for opening backdoors in their apps and services would handle it. Would they use the same backdoors that they give access to authorities in other countries or will they create a super specific backdoor just for EU.
Count042@lemmy.ml · 6 pts · 320d
Definitely continue the fight, but in the meantime, migrate to something like DeltaChat.
DieserTypMatthias@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 320d
Why not Matrix?
Count042@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 320d
I've run a matrix server with around 250 local users. The schema Matrix uses is fundementally flawed that leads to excessive resource usage, and the DB is very easy to corrupt. Plus, the encryption key management sucks in comparison to DeltaChat and SimpleX.
monovergent@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 320d
Very much agree with the encryption key management. My friend group and I stopped using Matrix because the getting encryption right between all of our devices proved frustrating, especially if a reinstall or phone upgrade comes up.
ZinQ@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 320d
Why not SimpleX?
Count042@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 320d
Federated servers, Multiple device access without the phone app being open, Decades old tried and true backend protocol that would be a problem to ban.
Also https://webxdc.org/
ZinQ@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 320d
Well I'm not the most technical but on SimpleX you have no user ID's, routing through TOR and running your own servers among many other features (like the one that adds a radom delay to measages)
Count042@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 320d
You effectively have no user id's with chatmail relays with DeltaChat. Routing of messages uses the default TCP/IP stack and so you can just use TOR if you want to. Mentioning a chat systems ability to use TOR, as if that should be a part of the chat program rather than the system it self seems strange to me.
ZinQ@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 320d
I see, I'll keep this DeltaChat in mind. So far I've been really enjoying SimpleX, It's one of my favorite apps
sleen@lemmy.zip · 4 pts · 320d