810

Moritz Körner, Member of the European Parliament, disclosed the decision on Twitter. Swedish publisher SVG said, “The question was removed at the last moment from Thursday’s ambassadorial meeting in Brussels”.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] shortwavesurfer@monero.town 94 points 2 years ago

Wasn't this rejected once already? Perhaps if they wanted to do something useful, they should pass something that says that if something is majority disliked twice or something, then it should be withdrawn and not proposed again for at least 100 years.

[-] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 97 points 2 years ago

They will keep trying again and again and again. The assault on privacy has been going on for decades and it will never stop.

[-] Dasnap@lemmy.world 73 points 2 years ago

You've gotta defend for an infinite amount of time, but they've only gotta succeed once.

[-] ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.de 5 points 2 years ago

Yes. Technically, a similar vote could repeal the law just as easily but there is a history of governments not giving their power away easily; implementing it also sets a precedent and creates technical enforcement options for other governments willing to go through with something similar in the future, or for hackers to exploit because gov-rooted devices will remain in operation for years after the potential repeal.

[-] oce@jlai.lu 2 points 2 years ago

2001 especially.

[-] cmeio@lemmy.world 18 points 2 years ago

Such a rule is basically un-enforceable. Because it is nearly never exactly the same text. So it is always the first time voted on.

[-] Tywele@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

What they could do is create a law that protects the integrity of E2EE. At least in this case.

But I guess that will never happen... Well, a girl can dream.

[-] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 9 points 2 years ago

It was protected by the ECHR in a recent ruling. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2024/03/european-court-human-rights-confirms-undermining-encryption-violates-fundamental

However, Chat Control 2.0 argues that since the spying is done before the content is encrypted, it's somehow ok. 🙄

[-] uis@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago

It seems ECHR is best court. They fuck Putin, they fuck mass surveilance.

[-] uis@lemm.ee 1 points 2 years ago

Or law that forbids any mass surveilance. By any entity.

[-] PonyOfWar@pawb.social 7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Either way they can just give it a new name and change some details to propose it again. Like how they made it "voluntary" this time (but you can only send text if you don't agree).

[-] MonkderDritte@feddit.de 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Better define some basic human rights as a core tenet and fire repeat offenders, because they are a danger to the population.

this post was submitted on 20 Jun 2024
810 points (99.5% liked)

Technology

88885 readers
3018 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 3 years ago
MODERATORS