this post was submitted on 29 May 2024
231 points (98.7% liked)

Technology

59422 readers
2824 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 content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  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, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
L3s@fry.gs
L4s@fry.gs
L4s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
231
‘Let yourself be monitored’: EU governments to agree on Chat Control with user “consent” [updated] (www.patrick-breyer.de)
submitted 5 months ago by nifty@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
38 comments fedilink hide all child comments
all 40 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] mox@lemmy.sdf.org 127 points 5 months ago (1 children)

users of apps with a communication function would have to agree via terms and conditions or pop-up messages that all images and videos sent to others will be scanned automatically and possibly reported to the EU and the police.

This is more like coercion than consent.

And let's be clear: The goal of legislation like this is not to allow investigating child abusers, which can already be done legally. The goal is to impose mass surveillance on the population, circumventing due process.

[–] dunz@feddit.nu 23 points 5 months ago (2 children)

What if I don't agree? No messages?

[–] lost_faith@lemmy.ca 16 points 5 months ago (1 children)

On the next EULA click no or don't agree and try using the service

[–] dunz@feddit.nu 7 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It works with cookie popups, except you need to deny them with every page load

[–] tb_@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago

Those are a little different.

[–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 5 months ago

Most likely.

[–] cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de 67 points 5 months ago (5 children)

This will probably just make peer to peer messaging apps more popular.

[–] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 22 points 5 months ago (4 children)

Briar is pretty cool if you're on Android.

[–] Cocodapuf@lemmy.world 5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

What's the advantage over signal?

[–] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago (1 children)

If you have Internet it uses tor and there's no main server to rely on.

If there's no Internet it can use Bluetooth and Wi-Fi locally.

[–] Cocodapuf@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

Well I have to admit, those are some pretty snazzy tricks...

Using tor on a per app basis is pretty cool, I wonder what the security implications are for that? If some, but not all of your traffic is going through tor, I wonder if it's easier to disentangle somehow... Probably it's still secure though.

[–] Audalin@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

Very cool and impressive, but I'd rather be able to share arbitrary files.

And looks like you can only send images in DMs, but not in groups/forums.

[–] EngineerGaming@feddit.nl 1 points 5 months ago

I am just sad that the desktop version is not as full-featured. The website says no Tor bridges, which here means no Tor connectivity at all. And it is weird that the mailbox is primarily for phones, even though phones are not supposed to be working permanently on a charger - they do have a cli one at least so you's probably be able to use something like a Raspberry instead, for now only buildable from source but hope it develops. But yea, very cool model! Although I would say for everyday less sensitive communication I would choose XMPP or Matrix instead.

[–] steersman2484@sh.itjust.works 10 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I don't think that most people will care

[–] LordCrom@lemmy.world 14 points 5 months ago (2 children)

99 percent of people won't care, won't understand, or just be part of the mindset of why be scared if we have nothing to hide.

Only us techs will care

[–] robigan@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

Facts, if I could donate a star or gold I would

[–] steersman2484@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I just don't get it why mainsteam media almost never reports about this.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.zip 3 points 5 months ago

Because it's not been free press for a long time.

Remember when journalism was supposed to be outrageous? That's not a mark of quality, that's a rule. If it's not outrageous, then it's most likely not journalism.

It also never reports on wars outside of the agreed upon narrative. There's time and narrative for everything. That doesn't happen with free press. There may not be open censorship and coercion, but not seeing something is different from knowing it doesn't exist.

[–] EngineerGaming@feddit.nl 8 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Less likely peer-to-peer, more likely selfhostable.

[–] Opisek@lemmy.world 5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Just in time for me to finally have completed my Matrix setup a few days ago.

[–] EngineerGaming@feddit.nl 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I prefer XMPP, which is lighter, but I have a Matrix server too and get why you'd prefer it.

[–] theherk@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago

Like a choice between cake and pizza.

[–] tal 6 points 5 months ago

Well, ones that aren't based on a service operating in the EU, at any rate.

[–] Oha@lemmy.ohaa.xyz 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

this could finally be a good "reason" to convice some people near me to get into meshtastic

[–] Bezzelbob@lemmy.world 60 points 5 months ago (3 children)

They always hide behind the claim it's for the children... but how many children have they actually saved from this?

[–] tal 40 points 5 months ago (2 children)

They always hide behind the claim it’s for the children

Sometimes it's the terrorists.

[–] pirat@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago

But... Are they then going to catch or protect all the terrorist children?

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.zip 0 points 5 months ago

It's so that children wouldn't get recruited by terrorists.

Extrapolating a bit, children here may symbolize the civilian casualties of that world order becoming a bit more open, and terrorists those of us who don't agree.

See, I can do this without alcohol.

[–] Beaver@lemmy.ca 21 points 5 months ago (1 children)

They’re probably gonna put parents behind bars for a misunderstanding on their private lives

[–] Bezzelbob@lemmy.world 39 points 5 months ago (1 children)

This reminds me of that time google was scanning photos and reported a man to the police for being a pedophile, turns out it was a father sending a picture to his doctor

[–] Beaver@lemmy.ca 15 points 5 months ago

That's our tax dollars at work.

[–] applepie@kbin.social 5 points 5 months ago

Catholic clergy is sill grifting around this here country...

[–] archchan@lemmy.ml 38 points 5 months ago

If consent mattered, governments and corporations all around the world wouldn't be pushing to expand the global surveillance apparatus.

Is this just another Tuesday now? Fuck me.

[–] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 14 points 5 months ago

Self hosting for the win!

[–] uebquauntbez@lemmy.world 13 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I'd vote for testing this mass chat control on politicians and CEOs of the companies that want this mass control. Let's say for the next 10 years? Or 20? Pretty sure the results will be great. For people, for justice, for democracy.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.zip 3 points 5 months ago

That won't happen. What will happen is that functionality will be there, on paper requiring your consent, but you'll never know how many times they've used it without consent.

They will read your correspondence, find threats to their power, make sure by soft nudges that those never materialize.

People saying that USSR was democratic will get to live in one, only without even the ideology of "freeing the humanity, building communism and colonizing space".

[–] barryamelton@lemmy.ml 11 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Even if you don't opt in, 99% of the people you interact with would have opted in. So you will monitored as they please.

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago

As if any chat systems inteded for dubious purposes in the darknet would give a flying f-ck about this law.