this post was submitted on 11 Oct 2025
310 points (71.2% liked)

Technology

76008 readers
2660 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 news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  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, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
L4s@hackingne.ws
310
EU Chat Control didnt pass - proving the media got to alot of you (www.patrick-breyer.de)
submitted 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by themurphy@lemmy.ml to c/technology@lemmy.world
105 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

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 are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] iii@mander.xyz 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

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?

[–] Alaknar@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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!

[–] iii@mander.xyz 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

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.

When people, rightfully, get angry the local politician will say "we had to because EU". And the EU will say "well we didn't say it had to be in that way, it's your local politician that did that."

[–] Alaknar@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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".

[–] iii@mander.xyz 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I have: here's the relevant paragraph from the directive:

Amendment 186 Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Disseminating pornographic content online without putting in place robust and effective age verification tools to effectively prevent children from accessing pornographic content online shall be punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least 1 year.

Pinky promise is explicitely not allowed.

And you're doing the exact thing: blaming the specific implementation 🙂 It's so sad that that still tricks people. Is this your first time learning how a EU directive works?

[–] Alaknar@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Tell you what: let's wait the 5-10 years of consultations and see what they end up doing, then let's come back to this discussion.

[–] iii@mander.xyz 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Boiling the frog 👍

[–] Alaknar@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 day ago

That's basically the definition of democracy.

"Democracy is a horrible system, but nobody has invented anything better yet". Can't remember who said it. Churchill, maybe?