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

Technology

76008 readers
3026 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
 

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.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 3abas@lemmy.world 24 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Jesus Christ, you think this will be the last attempt?

[–] Tryenjer@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

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.

[–] dogs0n@sh.itjust.works 40 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

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.

P.s. i really don't like this post and hopefully it doesn't change anyones mind about action on this type of stuff in the future.. we need action and to keep fightijg to keep our freedoms.

[–] ChogChog@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago

"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.

[–] Tattorack@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago

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.

[–] 1984@lemmy.today 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

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.

[–] Mechaguana@programming.dev 28 points 2 days ago (1 children)

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

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] HazardousBanjo@lemmy.world 30 points 2 days ago (1 children)

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.

[–] IzzyJ@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

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

[–] Darkenfolk@sh.itjust.works 143 points 3 days ago (4 children)

What kind of shit take is this?

Media made people aware of ongoing bullshit, people reacted and put pressure on their governments and somehow "media got to us"?

If anything it didn't pass because of media attention.

[–] Lfrith@lemmy.ca 42 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Yeah, keeping the public in the dark so people against it aren't there to voice their opinion is how these like this get passed. Media attention to inform the public was a good thing.

[–] slaacaa@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

What kind of shit take is this?

The lemmy.ml kind, check OP’s profile

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] xodoh74984@lemmy.world 184 points 3 days ago

I believe it should be all over the media to ensure that it never passes. Democracy dies in darkness. Name and shame those who supported it.

[–] Prunebutt@slrpnk.net 156 points 3 days ago (12 children)

Isn't this how liberal democracies are supposed to work? How exactly did "the media" get the better of "us"?

[–] Iheartcheese@lemmy.world 65 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Good thing happens.

wAkE Up ShEePlE

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] lowleekun@ani.social 21 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I guess op was pessimistic as was i and that's the narrative that was/kind of pushed: It is going to come in one way or another. Instead of: It is not going to win and if it is we are not going to accept it.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
[–] Passerby6497@lemmy.world 70 points 2 days ago

"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.

[–] artyom@piefed.social 93 points 3 days ago (7 children)

Proving even on Lemmy, you and me are extremly prone to propaganda.

What? LOL Who do you think is pushing said "propaganda" to make people fear Chat Control unnecessarily?

And we got told so many times, that EU now wants Chat Control. But it was a big fat lie.

It was demonstrably not a lie. There were so many regions in support of it that it was dangerously close to passing.

I'm thinking this post is the propaganda. Really really lazy propaganda.

Don't worry, it'll be back again in a few months with a new coat of paint.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] ashughes@feddit.uk 87 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Not going to downvote this because the source article is useful, but OP’s take is ludicrous. Have we really reached the point where ALL media is propaganda?

It might be time to unplug society and plug it back in again.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] sauerkrautsaul@lemmus.org 97 points 3 days ago (4 children)

Yeah... no.

Germany switched to opposed partially because people knew about it and contacted their representatives.

They contacted their representatives because they heard about it.. through the media.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] UnfortunateShort@lemmy.world 44 points 2 days ago (1 children)

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?

[–] Alaknar@sopuli.xyz 12 points 2 days ago (2 children)

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.

[–] scratchee@feddit.uk 18 points 2 days ago

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.

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

That's the same EU that mandates online de-anonymisation, punishable with up to a year in prison, as a last minute amendment to an unrelated CSAM-directive.

Some press releases: (1), (2), (3)

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

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.

[–] 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)
[–] 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?

[–] cley_faye@lemmy.world 39 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Good news. But I'm downvoting that post. OP's living in reverse crying-wolf land, it seems.

First, Chat Control got further than previous attempts, with a bigger scope than ever. Being worried about that is not the result of propaganda.

Second, a lot of countries where on board, including Germany. Stuff changed after lot of feedback. You can be cynical all you want arguing that "people's voice don't matter" and saying there's no causality there, but people made themselves heard, and thing moved. There's no telling what would have happened if they didn't.

The proposal being ultimately shot down (this time!) does not mean, at ALL, that it wasn't a very dangerous one.

[–] ripcord@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago

This post reminds me of a bunch of the "y2k scare was a hoax and a waste of money!" stuff from back in the day. With a bunch of people not realizing how much shit was fixed and what massive success it all was.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] yakko@feddit.uk 64 points 3 days ago

Are you mad that people got mad? Anger is not a subtle political instrument, a win is a win.

[–] tomalley8342@lemmy.world 52 points 3 days ago (1 children)

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.

This is what the EU democracy opinion was as of July 2024 BTW, before the "media got to you":

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] BananaTrifleViolin@lemmy.world 40 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (5 children)

What a bizarre take. The EU council is backing down - they do want chat control but each time they propose it they meet resistance and back down. Then they come back again and try again.

To suggest the public reaction is overblown and media manipulation is bizarre. This is the 3rd or 4th time the EU has attempted to get this through. Just because they chickened out of a vote doesn't mean the politicians don't want this.

In a democracy votes happen. In the EU they keep resurrecting this terrible idea hoping to get it through but then backing away if they don't think they can win. They know if there was an actual vote it likely would put an end to his.

Also the EU council is the antithesis of a democracy. It is not directly elected - instead it's a club of the heads of states of all the countries in the EU. It just represents who happens to be in charge of each country, and gives equal weights to all those countries regardless of their population size. The EU has a Parliament but it's a fig leaf of democracy as so much power is held in bodies like the Council and the Commission (which is 1 post per state and horse traded not elected).

So please don't make this out as a sign that EU democracy works. If EI democracy was working properly they would have listened the first time, and they'd have moved to a directly elected system for the executive Council and commission years ago.

The EU gets too much of a free pass for "not being America" but it's got huge problems that need fixing to make it an actual democracy.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] exu@feditown.com 44 points 3 days ago (7 children)

It didn't pass because people pressured Germany to reject it. If Germany had stayed undecided they would definitely have had a vote on Chat Control and potentially passed it.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] mrductape@eviltoast.org 22 points 2 days ago

Troll post. Not falling for it. Bye.

[–] Tetsuo@jlai.lu 25 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (3 children)

We will have to fight Chat Control again and again...

Mass Surveillance should be blocked at the constitutional level in all countries.

On another point, my country, France is in a very deep political turmoil right now, so thanks for the robust response of our German friends that was definitely critical. I wish we could have mobilized better in France but we are struggling to just have a working government right now...

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] RunawayFixer@lemmy.world 25 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Would the outcome have been the same without people in the media repeatedly bringing this to everyone's attention? Probably not, because there would have been no public pressure against it, while the shadow groups that want this would have still been lobbying the politicians.

Something bad is going to happen.
Some people advocate to stop that bad thing.
Even more people are holding their clutches that the bad thing might happen.
Because of public pressure, action is undertaken to prevent the bad thing from happening.
Thanks to those efforts, the bad thing is successfully averted.

Some random person: that bad thing was never going to happen, look at all those gullible people who were panicking over nothing, we could have just done nothing and the outcome would have been the same.

Also known as the "preparedness paradox": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preparedness_paradox

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] AnAnonymousApe@lemmy.ml 21 points 3 days ago

What an idiotic take on the issue.

load more comments
view more: next ›