this post was submitted on 11 Jul 2024
572 points (100.0% liked)

Privacy

789 readers
13 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

Chat rooms

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
top 36 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Rikj000@discuss.tchncs.de 85 points 4 months ago (3 children)

Would be handy if they included a pre-written pdf to oppose this proposition + emails or forms to easily submit your opposition to each of the countries.

Instead it's a general "contact your government",
which 99% of normal people do not know how to do, me included.

[–] noodlejetski@lemm.ee 29 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

from the linked website:

Ask you government to call on the European Commission to withdraw the chat control proposal. Point them to a joint letter that was recently sent by children’s rights and digital rights groups from across Europe. Click here to find the letter and more information.

one paragraph below that:

When reaching out to your government, the ministries of the interior (in the lead) of justice and of digitisation/telecommunications/economy are your best bet. You can additionally contact the permanent representation of your country with the EU.

the bold parts are clickable URLs in the original text.

[–] Lojcs@lemm.ee 27 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Is there was such a pdf, your government already received it. You writing in your own words is unique

[–] Chadus_Maximus@lemm.ee 21 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Not necessarily the best idea. My representative went on national television accusing bots of spamming her email, even though every single one of those probably was a person using some template that was provided. Those forms go straight into trash unfortunately. Best to use them as a guideline and write your personal concerns instead.

Alternatively, ChatGPT. No idea if it works, though.

[–] 211@sopuli.xyz 69 points 4 months ago (2 children)

They'll keep bringing this up again and again and again until it passes, huh.

Next Council deliberations and vote in October-December.

[–] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 6 points 4 months ago

The real goal is to get the population to regret demanding things like gdpr.

Similar to the plastic industry's covert legislative push to ban plastic straw.

Irritate the public enough to stop them demanding more.

In this case it's a double whammy of also getting our sweet private data for their AI models.

[–] Stitch0815@feddit.org 2 points 3 months ago

Yes and no As long as there is no wide spread opposition they will Long term we need to make this a very unpopular stance

[–] Kekzkrieger@feddit.org 52 points 4 months ago (2 children)

If only in the same breath we would make all the politicians text messages public, guess they only want other chats to be controlled but not their own.

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 38 points 4 months ago (2 children)

I keep mentioning this idea, hoping to someday make it seem less extreme: the government should be under total surveillance 24/7.

Like, anyone at any time can look through any of the tens of thousands of cameras saturating every government building.

[–] 96VXb9ktTjFnRi@feddit.nl 11 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Open source government, eh? Don't know if this would work completely but I like the direction.

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 6 points 3 months ago

Army and police get to have non-camera operations of course. They’re still recorded, just not broadcast for whatever delay makes the tactical information obsolete.

[–] probableprotogen@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Honestly this is an intersting idea. Albeit, it may be hatd to implement since some buildings have to be private for national security reasons (specifically regarding military strategy and such).

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 4 points 3 months ago

Military’s camera feeds go into memory crystals that automatically unshuffle after like 50 years. That way history is guaranteed to get a full accounting of the conflict, but there’s no possibility of strategic information giveaway.

[–] h4lf8yte@lemmy.ml 8 points 3 months ago

Even if I deeply like the Idea, something like this could backfire if it's done constantly and not just once. But I would like to see a law that makes the usage of government communications mandatory for all government-related communication while storing everything revision-proof on their servers with different access rights. And a second law that makes it possible to access it by requiring petitions to be singled by a low number of people. Less extreme but still makes it harder to be corrupt.

[–] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 38 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)
[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 11 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone 2 points 3 months ago

When you’re delivering a powerful epigram and suddenly become hyper-aware you’re standing next to Jimmy Smits in a cheap plastic cape.

[–] eveninghere 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

So tired. These Nazis should be called out for what they are.

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Just to be clear authoritarian is not Nazi

[–] eveninghere 1 points 3 months ago

Yes, but if they support Nazis,

[–] toastal@lemmy.ml 37 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Folks, this should inspire you to start self-hosting a federated, decentralized chat server with freely available source code by yourself or with a small community. Governments can coerce these big, usually-corpo centralized servers to give up data but good luck if there are hundreds of thousands (of millions?) of small servers with 1–10 users on it & clients not controlled by a single entity for distribution (easier now that y’all coerced Mommy Apple to let you sideload applications & use alternative package managers).

[–] DieserTypMatthias@lemmy.ml 3 points 3 months ago

Matrix I guess?

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 24 points 4 months ago

That's a lot of red

[–] makeasnek@lemmy.ml 23 points 3 months ago

Relying on legislation to get passed or not get passed only gets us so far. Yes, absolutely, write your reps and vote, but also donate to your favorite decentralized, private tech project so they can improve the user experience and get more users. We need to make tyrannical censorship & surveillance not only technically impossible but politically unfeasible. The way we do that is by building better tech and getting more and more of the population to use it.

[–] foremanguy92_@lemmy.ml 11 points 4 months ago

That's a good move to re-share it! THX for the people 👍

[–] Crow@mander.xyz 8 points 3 months ago (2 children)

My biggest takeaway from this infographic is that norway is not part of the EU, who would’ve thought

You can pry my fishing rights from my cold dead hands!

Norway just like Switzerland are too ~~rich~~ cool to join the club, we are still a part of the European Economic Area and Schengen though.

[–] sharkfucker420@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 months ago

Good for them? Idk how good the EU is

[–] TheChargedCreeper864@lemmy.ml 5 points 3 months ago

The Netherlands only remains "neutral" because of the clause that forces companies to detect unknown CSAM and/or "grooming" material (last time I checked). It's only a matter of one or two countries that can make the difference, with most neutral countries probably having similarly "minor" objections.

[–] DominicDeligann@lemmy.ml 4 points 3 months ago

once upon a time freedom of speech was a thing

[–] eveninghere 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Therefore there is a real threat that the required majority for mass scanning of private communications may be achieved at any time under the current Hungarian presidency (Hungary being a supporter of the proposal).

Why did they let this Hungarian pro-Nazi idiot regime lead anything?

[–] ErwinLottemann@feddit.de 6 points 3 months ago

because it changes every 6 months and everyone get's a turn

[–] drathvedro@lemm.ee 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

At first glance I thought it was only Belarus who opposed it. That'd be a weird world where totalitarian government opposes totalitarian control.

[–] EunieIsTheBus@feddit.de 16 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Let me guess: You are an American with no clue about Geography / foreign politics?

  1. Belarus isn't in the EU. Its position doesn't matter, independent from which side they are on.

  2. Belarus is part of the big grey blob in the east of the map (alongside Ukraine and Russia). So the map doesn't state anything about Belarus' opinion on the topic.

  3. In case you thought the dark green blob in central Europe is Belarus: those are Germany and Poland.

[–] drathvedro@lemm.ee 5 points 3 months ago

No, I'm Belarusian.

  1. In case you haven't noticed, I said "At first glance"
  2. Due to the map being zoomed in a little closer than usual, and because of the omissions of countries borders, it shifts visual appearance of countries towards right. A honest mistake if you ask me, and which I found to be funny, hence the comment.
  3. Why so serious?
  4. What being an American has to do with this? Anyway, I'll take that as a compliment for my English.
[–] Alienmonkey@lemm.ee 3 points 3 months ago

On this map I see a Rastafarian llama with a duck for an ass and tail.

The Nederlands is the duck.

Huh.