8 ms·
Finland to vote against the EU mass surveillance and encryption ban directive
- re-lre-l 3y ago[flagged]
- begrid 3y agoGood. Google translate: https://dawn-fi.translate.goog/uutiset/2023/10/14/eu-csam-suomi-eduskunta-kanta?_x_tr_sl=fi&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en-US&_x_tr_pto=wapp https://dawn-fi.translate.goog/uutiset/2023/10/14/eu-csam-su...
- MongoTheMad 3y agoYou cannot trust Google translate with Finnish. For example: Both of these sentences mean the same thing, but are translated differently by Google translate (mobile app, if that makes a difference): Suden syö karhu. Karhu syö suden. Your best bet is to learn Finnish instead of relying on a translator.
- stainablesteel 3y agoawesome politicians really are the most disgusting people in the modern day, if someone can't go on a podcast and openly discuss why they want to do something, they're basically a fraud "we need more security" isn't a reason. why do you need to be obscure? what are the threats? i want to know them. share them. there's no harm in me knowing. as a matter of fact there's probably a few million people in your own country that can come up with a better solution than you. why not crowdsource? it's irresponsible behavior to keep these secrets
- pmezard 3y agoWhy are you not a politician?
- notyourwork 3y ago(Not passing judgement towards op.) Likely because many intelligent people are compensated more highly in the private sector.
- ta8645 3y ago> intelligent people We're constantly patting ourselves on the back for how intelligent we are. And yet we fail to address such systemic problems, which reduce our quality of life. This feels much more like stroking our own egos while letting ourselves off the hook, than an insightful analysis of the situation.
- getoj 3y agoIf you’re smart enough to make good money, you can ignore politics for the most part. These changes will offend your sense of justice but they won’t really harm you. On the other hand, if you try to change the system, it is highly likely to destroy your life. The rational decision is to stay out of politics and live comfortably. I think this is a highly effective feature of the global liberal-capitalist system: most people smart enough to win the game are smart enough not to play.
- ta8645 3y ago> On the other hand, if you try to change the system, it is highly likely to destroy your life. What that implies is that being especially smart isn't sufficient. If being smart was a powerful differentiator, then there would be an opportunity for smart people to enter politics. They would excel because they would have a competitive advantage over the less intelligent people who are currently in politics. They would have the smarts to avoid pitfalls, and profit from their powerful status and accomplishments. But apparently they don't do this because every single person who is smart enough, has a better opportunity elsewhere. Every single one? I think the more likely reality, is this theory about insufficient compensation being the primary issue, is bunk.
- notyourwork 3y ago
- peoplefromibiza 3y ago> politicians really are the most disgusting people which one? not those who vote the things we like or against the things we don't like I suppose. am I right? politicians are people, made the same way as anyone else, they are different he same way people in the society are different. you're basically saying that people are the most disgusting people.
- avgcorrection 3y agoPoliticians are not some random sampling of the population, no. But with sortition they could be.
- peoplefromibiza 3y ago> Politicians are not some random sampling of the population, no. of course they are not random, like medics and engineers are not random, but they certainly are more representative of the sentiments of the population than many other jobs out there.
- avgcorrection 3y ago> , but they certainly are more representative of the sentiments of the population than many other jobs out there. Tens-of-millionaires certainly are not.[1] What kind of jobs are supposed to be less representative of the population? Big corporation CEOs? [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37893547 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37893547
- peoplefromibiza 3y agoas I've said, they are not representative of the population, but of their sentiment. Millionaires are - weirdly enough - loved and respected by a large chunk of the people and all too often even worshiped. See Musk or Jobs or Trump
- Proven 3y agoWhat does that even mean? The EU doesn't need Finland's "vote". It's decided at the EU level.
- nixgeek 3y agoIt's going to vote soon. It isn't just "decided" at the EU level, there is a vote. Voting power is proportional to EU citizenship and to pass it needs a supermajority. It's not just Finland which opposes this either (they have a small population - 5.6M citizens). Larger countries like Germany (83M citizens) also oppose it but I also don't think they've quite so clearly stated they will vote against. Austria (9.1M) and Estonia (1.4M) are also mentioned and if they all vote "No", that is a bit over 99M people which is only 22% of EU citizens. So not enough to prevent it passing. No idea where the rest of the EU bloc sits on Yes/No, I'm hoping it does *not* pass. Quoting from the translation where they explain how it works: "EU countries will vote on the proposal at the end of October. At that time, the proposal will go through, if it is not opposed by a number of countries representing a total of at least 35 percent of EU citizens." [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_European_Union_member_states_by_population https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_European_Union_member_...
- miohtama 3y agoCountries that are going to vote yes - Spain (caught using Pegasus spyware to spy their own politicians) - Hungary (Orban has good dictator vibes) - Cyprus https://www.wired.com/story/europe-break-encryption-leaked-document-csa-law/ https://www.wired.com/story/europe-break-encryption-leaked-d...
- Reubend 3y agoMy understanding from a translation of the article is that each country will vote, and this committee decision bind Finland to a "no" vote. > EU countries will vote on the proposal at the end of October. At that time, the proposal will go through, if it is not opposed by a number of countries representing a total of at least 35 percent of EU citizens.
- mrmanner 3y ago
- stracer 3y agoIf this passes, I expect disobedience and even more calls for leaving the EU. EU: Company, this looks like you're facilitating breaking the EU law. Encryption we can't break is forbidden, except when we use it. Company: Prove it. Maybe we're just sending random bytes to test the network.
- matheusmoreira 3y agoI wish. I doubt these corporations will choose leaving the market over selling out their users.
- tomkarho 3y agoDidn't Whatsapp and few others threaten to do just that in UK? I'm not saying they would necessarily put their money where their mouth is if push comes to shove but implications were made that should encryption laws pass, bye bye Briton.
- matheusmoreira 3y agoThey sure as hell didn't threaten to leave my country when our supreme court started slapping them with arbitrary fines for campaigning against internet censorship on their own websites. I find it difficult to believe they'd leave a country with a much stronger economy.
- amadeuspagel 3y agoThere's a difference between accepting a country's (inane) laws restricting your own speech, and breaking a fundamental feature of your service.
- stracer 3y agoWait, which country supreme court did that???
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- matheusmoreira 3y agoWhen will these politicians stop using children to justify their political atrocities? They couldn't give less of a fuck about children. It's all about maintaining their own power, persecuting dissidents, criminalizing the political opposition, stamping out wrongthink. You expect me to believe they "need" all this shit to defeat terrorists? They couldn't even stop Hamas from attacking Israel with all the illegal surveillance states in the world. It's gotten to the point where I just dismiss such arguments outright. It's like the Godwin's law of encryption and surveillance. If you make such an argument, it's likely you're trying to manipulate others and are therefore wrong. Using children as political weapons is a form of abuse too and they seriously gotta stop.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- PeterStuer 3y ago'They couldn't even stop Hamas from attacking Israel with all the illegal surveillance states in the world' I've yet to hear an at least plausible story of how a massive prep operation could not just have been missed by the world's most advanced embedded spy agencies in what is possibly the most surveiled group in the world, but then not just effectively executed but lingered on without direct response at again, maybe with exception of Korea, the most heavily secured high tech guarded border in the world.
- matheusmoreira 3y agoYeah. Fucked up, isn't it? Israel is home to literal corporations providing cyber weapons and digital espionage as a service and they couldn't protect their citizens from this attack. These politicians totally "need" to break our encryption though. For our safety.
- stracer 3y agoYeah, you see, it's a different kind of threat. Hamas is just the usual terrorists, from time to time they grow and get organized, and then we look surprised and outraged when they attack, and stump them out or use them in some proxy war. Don't worry, we have that under control. With encryption, it's a whole another story. The danger is much greater. People may read hate speech or Putin's propaganda, and spread it on the Internet. This is a threat to democracy. Or even worse, they may communicate freely and share independent unsanctioned news. We don't yet have a tool for that, so we're working hard on it.
- toyg 3y agoThis sort of explicit public stand is important, even coming from a small country, because it gives other countries something to hang their hat on. It signals that the directive is not a done deal.
- logicchains 3y agoIf encryption is banned, is there currently an open source, encrypted, pseudoanonymous chat app that Europeans could build and run themselves? Does Matrix qualify?
- bushbaba 3y agoYou could just encrypt the text going over the “wire” things like a one time pad would likely be incredibly effective for most.
- Condition1952 3y agoThere used to be a website which would allow you to encrypt and decrypt data. I was expecting some kind of Firefox addon to implement this kind of encryption to regular messaging websites
- earnesti 3y agoThere are browser addons for pgp, for example. However none have gained big popularity.
- 7373737373 3y agoIt's a failure of browsers not to include identity/key management beyond usernames and passwords
- doublepg23 3y agoI believe PassKeys are fixing that.
- matheusmoreira 3y agoTheir next move in the politico-technological arms race is to pass a law that says the judge is allowed to assume you're guilty of whatever they're accusing you of if you're found to be in possession of encrypted data and refuse to decrypt it to prove your innocence. An encrypted drive? Looks like you're a drug trafficking money laundering child raping terrorist and it's off to the gulag with you.
- Eumenes 3y ago> It is known that at least Germany, Austria and Estonia oppose the proposal. There are clearly more supporters known, e.g. Spain, Denmark, Hungary and Ireland support the Commission proposal Hungary surprises me as a supporter for this
- stracer 3y agoOrban & Co. "work for the family" so not a big shocker. Plus more power over what people can see or do on the Internet, an attractive tool of state power. Controlling TV stations and major outlets works on pensioneers, the next step is get control of the phones and computers. With more Orwell from the EU itself, stuff like phone hacks of journalists and political opponents will get easier.
- hollander 3y agoHungary is the least surprising.
- C60H92O6 3y agoPrivacy must belong to no one, or everyone, but no where in between; i.e. privacy must not be owned by a certain class or group. If I can read anyone's messages, I'm absolutely fine with everyone else reading mine. If governments want access to our data, they should open up their data for us to see as well. Honestly I'd love to live in a world where everything is out in the open, no secrets, no agendas, nothing to hide, no passwords. Everyone knows everyone's intentions, perhaps even thoughts one day via Neurolink. I think after the initial chaos in the first couple of decades, humanity will leap forward beyond imagination.
- mirekrusin 3y agoI don't think your bank account would stay with positive balance for long?
- IggleSniggle 3y agoThis is a beautiful thought, but also a very ugly one at the same time. When only "approved thoughts" can be given voice, even if those thoughts are weighed by a super-majority, is the organism of humanity truly healthy? Monocultures are dangerous to themselves. The only way to have heterogeneity is by allowing for the existence of secrets.
- teaearlgraycold 3y agoI don't know if you'd need to only have approved thoughts. I think the world would need to accept that people have different values and people don't completely align with their own values. Someone would do, say, or think something wrong and the response would be "meh" (depending on the consequences of course).
- ptero 3y agoThat is a cool concept, but I do not think it has ever been realized in practice; which may indicate it is not even realizable. A community might come close during good times, but once the fortunes turn there are always hunts for scapegoatsband witches. My 2c.
- EGreg 3y agoWouldn’t this law be unconstitutional according to the EU constitution? Its own top legal departments seem to say so https://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2023/06/eu-member-states-still-cannot-agree-about-end-end-encryption https://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2023/06/eu-member-states-...
- masswerk 3y agoWhat's most concerning to me is that this is the Commission pushing this agenda. The European Council is already a mash-up of national populism of all kind, but the Commission is expected to be the (last) bastion of reason against this. Then, as we deep-dive into this {$favorite_swear_word}, we're going to replace deliberate warrants issued by judges for individual cases by general scanning, because A.I.? Really? — This kind of thinking may be the real threat in A.I., derailing reason itself in some kind of drunken illusion of omnipotence. It's like the military-industrial complex for the civil world.
- hollander 3y agoA.I. will definitely be used to scan the data
- nextos 3y agoIt is very concerning. However, can they enforce this? How will they prevent me from e.g. connecting to a XMPP or a Signal server hidden behind Tor? IMHO, they will only be able to spy on regular citizens. Obviously, this is not a reason not to lobby against the law.
- Gud 3y ago1) they will fine meta/Apple/etc until they comply 2) they will fine FOSS developers until they comply 3) they will fine YOU until you comply
- nextos 3y agoI don't think this is feasible if its only a EU-wide regulation. It is hard to prevent me or any regular user from downloading and running software. Are they going to block Git forges and repositories? They won't be able to see what my communications are, nor confirm what I am using if I tunnel all traffic through Tor or a VPN. Will they block VPNs like authoritarian states?
- 7373737373 3y agohttps://www.patrick-breyer.de/en/posts/messaging-and-chat-control/ https://www.patrick-breyer.de/en/posts/messaging-and-chat-co... The blatant disregard for and violation of the basic rights of hundreds of millions of humans by the few putting forward this proposal is or at least borders on the criminal in my opinion
- eterps 3y ago> Hosting services affected include web hosting, social media, video streaming services, file hosting and cloud services > Even personal storage that is not being shared, such as Apple’s iCloud, will be subject to chat control This is new to me. In that case it looks like all services with encryption 'baked in' lose their effectiveness. And that encryption/decryption of text & data needs to be done independently of said service layer to regain privacy. What if generic encryption apps would integrate with chat apps and the like? According to these rules the chat apps are still required to do scanning, but that will be done on encrypted data which seems pointless. Unless the rules will be adapted at some point that general encryption needs to be scanned as well, but that would be impractical and undesirable for the EU as well.
- camdenlock 3y agoHopefully this will wake more people up to the inherent evil of the EU, causing more countries to leave.
- merdaverse 3y agoIs there some way to get involved in this to make sure it doesn't happen?