If u make privacy illegal then only criminals will have privacy.
If u make privacy illegal then only cops, spooks, governments, billionaires and other criminals will have privacy. FTFY.
Yep, you just said the same thing with more words 😁
If u make privacy illegal then only
copscriminals,spookscriminals,governmentscriminals,billionairescriminals and other criminals will have privacy. FTFY.FTFY.
That also works for guns.
You can’t murder a room full of children with pgp.
Say that again after you sit the same IT exams as I did.
Not with that kind of attitude!
I already have a chainsaw for that kind of thing, that does this have to do with guns and encryption?
Yeah, that’s the point. What do guns have to do with encryption? I could say “If you outlaw beards, only outlaws will have beards” and it will make as much sense as your original post. I appreciate that you have a weird fetish for violence but you don’t have to shoe-horn it into every conversation.
Privacy and guns can be used for defense. Beards generally don’t affect that (though Alexander was of a different opinion and made his soldiers shave so that they couldn’t be grabbed by the beard ; I think same was the reasoning for Roman soldiers shaving their beards and other hair).
You can’t murder a room full of children with pgp.
I’ll just say it again in the hope that it might dawn on you that the two things are not even remotely similar enough that you can say “this also works for guns”.
I’ve already described specifically how they are similar, it might dawn on you that repetition doesn’t strengthen an argument. Not hopeful though.
Only in the only country that believes that.
What? You think criminals don’t have guns in yours?
By the way, a country can’t believe anything, it’s an artificial concept on a map.
Unironically yes. Out of 1000 crime news I hear about here, maybe one of them is about gun violence. Also I have never ever heard about mass killings here like USA seems to have every week.
Look up stats, because what’s reported in media is always quite different.
Lol is it really that hard for you to believe? I am not just talking about media channels, also just word around the block, multiple YouTube channels and such.
Not that hard. I’d say organized crime will have guns regardless. Usual hooligans will do with many things one can imagine.
That’s what I think. That’s what I observed (anecdotally) and what statistics show. When the sentence for having a gun is higher than robbery or drug dealing or whatever, even criminals avoid that shit.
Why would you think criminals DO have guns in other countries?
So is obtuseness and pedantry.
Sorry I made you fail.
You can be anti-guns but he is still right. Criminals do have weapons where I live, even though it’s illegal. Fortunately, we don’t have many criminals since the country is rich
I really don’t think you need to mansplain shit.
I don’t care if you are a woman, I didn’t even know. Also, you are the one being wrong
That’s a weird answer, I didn’t say that obtuseness\pedantry can believe in something.
You made nobody fail, accusing someone of these traits just means their correctness is socially unpleasant for you.
Sorry for your loss.
Uhh have you heard? Constitutional rights are ala cart now! Just pick and choose what you want! No big deal.
I’ve always been reluctant to rely on papers like any constitution as a base for my perceived rights.
Maybe as an argument, in the sense of “smart people have said that it should be and made some points in its favor”.
But in general it’s a horrid mistake to rely on a paper. Some people you haven’t given any consent will stamp a few saying that you are a slave and oops.
The reality is that there’s no way to consistently defend a right suppressed by legal arguments. If you can check the chain of laws giving you some right or taking it, you’ll always come to the point where it’s just “we all decide that’s law” and you were not part of that decision. And if you go the opposite way and just accept what’s made law, then you are dropping the idea of rights in its entirety, making decisions made by someone else a law for you.
My point is that this is unsolvable and one can’t replace good and evil with legal arguments. Laws will never be sufficiently good for that, even constitutional laws.
So I’m for right to arm oneself, but I don’t think there’s any magic allowing to universally prove that a thing is legally right or wrong.
Which is why, again, a journalism which isn’t outrageous is just public relations, a protest that doesn’t harm economy and break laws is just a demonstration, an a principle which can be overridden by a law or a threat of force is just virtue signalling.
And on Tuesday, 37 Members of Parliament signed an open letter to the Council of Europe urging legislators to reject Chat Control.
“We explicitly warn that the obligation to systematically scan encrypted communication, whether called ‘upload-moderation’ or ‘client-side scanning,’ would not only break secure end-to-end encryption, but will to a high probability also not withstand the case law of the European Court of Justice,” the MEPs said. “Rather, such an attack would be in complete contrast to the European commitment to secure communication and digital privacy, as well as human rights in the digital space.”
I hope to fuck this shit won’t get passed
As your own quote says, we can at least hope that if it passes, it will be found illegal by the courts and get rescinded.
Regardless of the supposed motivations, this is mass surveillance on a scale never seen before. The EU wants to become China 2.0.
It’s really disappointing
It’s highly likely that these laws will be passed because more people are voting for right wing leaders in EU, Right wing heavily supports this. If EU sets the example soon the whole world will follow.
Not just in the EU…
Go vote what left parties in your country think about it. It’s likely the same.
they call themselves “right wing”, but they arent. See here in orbanistan (hungary) orban and all his comrades were commie state party functionals, or were at least the part in the commie youth organization. Also they vote down 23 times (as of now) the disclosure of the commie state party agent files, serving commie dictatorships like PRC, and the soviet union mourner putin, etc. Just like AFD in germany, etc…
Authoritarians all of them
I can’t take anyone who says “commie” seriously. It’s like hearing an adult say they need to go potty.
Why? They never been communist, because they never believed in anything except of greed, authority. Thats why they are just commies
Right wingers and authoritarians get mixed up a lot.
no true scotsman fallacy
If it’s client side then pedos will just strip it out and keep on going. It’s a giant waste of time.
It’s nothing to do with stopping pedos. The people pushing this year-in and year-out don’t care THAT much about pedos. It’s not a cause that’s motivating enough for them to be putting in so much effort, trying to sneak in legislation after being repeatedly rebuffed.
The real people pushing this are lobbyists working for the companies that sell the monitoring software.
And for anyone wondering btw, this is actually a proven fact and not just a guess.
This article in german talks about the connections that the people pushing this have to the relevant tech industry companies.
Oh wow I didn’t know. Fuck Ashton Kutcher!
Its insane to me how it was entirely proven that this whole political movement is a giant fear mongering psyop and despite that its still being discussed at all.
It’s rather “tell me who’s your friend and I’ll tell you who you are”, most of specific people involved in pushing this have a history with authoritarian regimes, some genocidal.
Many things may change overnight.
It’s not a cause that’s motivating enough for them to be putting in so much effort, trying to sneak in legislation after being repeatedly rebuffed.
Until those trying are in jail explaining their motivations in detail, this won’t stop.
It’s really all about having a way to get past encryption so they can spy on everyone indiscriminately. It’s pushed that it’s to save kids and unmask pedos, but the people in charge know the pedophiles are their rich donors.
It’s about controlling opposition and making sure the wealthy can stay on top. Imagine if no small business can hide their information from their competitors.
It’s not just about wealth.
Or, you know, trivially circumvent it? Compress media, break up URLs? I don’t understand how this could possibly be effective.
It can’t be effective. The risk of false-positives is huge.
And all but guaranteed. I know I would protest this, and I’m sure there are enough like me that this would waste a lot of time for police.
Any circumvention argument misses the point.
90% of people won’t. The remaining 10% will be flagged and can be scrutinized more manually (without any violence which will get into news). It’s the way any surveillance works. Which is why non-backdoored e2e encryption for everyone in everything everywhere and death of centralized services are important to fight surveillance.
It’s like flowers covering body parts on photos, we kinda guess what’s there. If the whole photo is covered with flowers, that’s another story.
Wait till they make TOR illegal and force people to mask TOR traffic to look like HTTPS. Then produce a stream of rubbish alongside said HTTPS traffic so as to fool authorities. Lol at them thinking non-profit tech gurus are going to give them cake
You are answering a comment explaining why this is bullshit. “Gurus” are sufficiently rare to have other kinds of surveillance.
For some reason in every bad event there are plenty of people thinking evil is stupid.
What I’m trying to say is said gurus will build something that the masses can use (to the extent of the masses that know what Threema and Briar are).
My third sentence still applies. Do you realize that the situation presented is one with backdoors on every device and criminal responsibility for bypassing\removing those?
Yes, and this will affect everyone. Which is why I’m hopeful that organisations like the EFF, the TOR browser’s foundation, Graphene OS and the general Android community comes up with something that will prevent this. I hope this will push for greater efforts in obfuscation of traffic from TOR, I2P, Freenet, Wireguard and the like along with better education amongst the general population.
You could call me naive though, I suppose. Perhaps I expect too much
What a bullshit law. If things have flaws, they don’t just have flaws for the benefit of police or government agencies. They have flaws for anyone that knows them or discovers them. This stuff will still be accessible for smart criminals, even more so in corrupt governments.
An encryption with exploits is not an encryption, it’s a time bomb and it will blow up in your face at the worst moment.
And we have plenty of evidence of corrupt police colluding with crime rings for profit. I don’t see why it would be different here…
They want that. It’s no coincidence that people pushing this are all unelected.
It is a criminal takeover of the EU in its final stages (Europeans like to think they are very smart and have lots of strategic depth, but I’ll repeat that these are the final stages of it).
deleted by creator
I rate this meme accurate. Also, why are countries more free on the internet than america?
-concerned american
deleted by creator
Preaching to the choir
SLAMMED
M-M-M-M-M-M-MONSTER KILL-Kill-kill
“Slammed!”
Sneaky dickens…
Signal SLAMS EU bill!
Can we get a single journalist that can write a headline?
that’s what you get for having 2/3 right wing parties in the EU parliament
It’s not 2/3
