8 ms·

Let me guess, its the usual justifications. CSAM, terrorism? Well, if you give the government too much power, sooner or later they will become the child abuser

Let me guess, its the usual justifications. CSAM, terrorism? Well, if you give the government too much power, sooner or later they will become the child abusers and terrorists. And at that point, there will be no police you can really call, since those in power will be able to act with absolute power and absolute impunity.

worstspotgain 2y ago
Hungary's is one of Putin's puppet regimes, so it's really about Russian-style repression of the opposition.
- rdm_blackhole 2y ago
  You obviously have not read about this piece of legislation otherwise you would not have posted this comment. The law in question also dubbed "chat control" has been on the table for the last 3 years now. It's been rejected each time so far but it comes back every 6 months without fail. The reason Hungary is associated with "Chat control" this time is because Hungary holds the current presidency of the EU. This presidency changes every 6 months. Before Hungary, it was Belgium which was in charge and they too tried to get this law passed. This is what a country with the EU presidency does, they set their goals and then try to reach a consensus with the other countries. "Chat control" is one of these goals just like it was one of the goals of the Belgium presidency. So to come out and say the Hungary is pushing for this because they are Putin's puppet is not accurate at all. The EU commission, which I am pretty sure no one can accuse of being a puppet of Putin is the one who keep bringing this law not Hungary or a specific country in particular. Now, I am not saying that Hungary is not happy about this, in fact they may well be very glad that this law is being discussed (as it would allow them to enable a state of total surveillance on their citizens) but please let's remember that even Sweden and Spain are amongst the many countries in the EU that are actually supporting this law. To me that is the bigger problem, how can the EU be so supportive of personal privacy then come out with shit like this?
  - worstspotgain 2y ago
    Sure, but you're drawing a distinction without a functional difference. The following can both be true: - Hungary's Putin-puppet regime is in favor of banning encryption so as to repress the opposition and stay in power indefinitely. - Other EU political actors are in favor of banning encryption for their own reasons. My comment did not imply that all non-puppet political actors in the EU were against banning encryption.
    - rdm_blackhole 2y ago
      > Hungary's is one of Putin's puppet regimes, so it's really about Russian-style repression of the opposition Your first comment was vague and that is why I thought it was worth responding to it. I am glad we agree that Hungary is not the only one who is pushing for this law but you singled out Hungary in your comment so what was the intent there then? To be honest, I am just a bit fed up with people talking about Hungary as the bad guy in this particular instance due to it's ties with Putin all the while forgetting that even the "nice" and "progressive" countries such as Sweden and France and many others which are usually clamoring for privacy and sovereignty from big tech are also pushing for it. To me in this specific case Hungary is not the problem. The problem is the law itself and the fact that this law keeps coming back again and again in the so called bastion of democracy that is Europe (supposedly).
    - 123yawaworht456 2y ago
      - Hungary's Putin-puppet regime is in favor of banning encryption to repress the opposition = bad - Other EU political actors are in favor of banning encryption to repress the opposition = good
    - aguaviva 2y ago
      Hungary's Putin-puppet regime This may feel nifty to say and/or believe in, but has no connection to reality. Source: any Magyar you will talk to. Edit: For example [0], posted 5 minutes after I posted this. [0] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41625251 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41625251
- hulitu 2y ago
  Maybe, but this was started by the Biden's puppet regimes.
- Maro 2y ago
  > Hungary's is one of Putin's puppet regimes I'm Hungarian, I hate Orban [1], but your comment is not accurate. We have a lot of problems in Hungary (see my other comment in the thread), but we're not Putin's puppet regime. A puppet regime would imply that Orban was put in place by Putin and/or is kept in place by Putin, and is purely doing Putin's bidding. I've never heard anybody serious say this, nor have I ever seen any evidence of this. Although rhetorically Orban is definitely pro-Russia, in the end (after wasting everybody's time for a while) he always goes along with EU resolutions against Russia. Orban doesn't need Putin to stay in power, he has access to all of Hungary's tax income, and effectively also beyond that, due to the 2/3 majority which allows him to rewrite the constitution at will. Likely reasons Orban is friendly with Putin: (i) access to Russian oil (ii) Hungary's one and only power plant is Russian tech run by Russian techs (iii) Orban's regime is like a soft version of Putin's, so criticizing Putin would in some sense mean critizing himself, it'd be counter-productive for him. [1] https://bytepawn.com/why-i-dont-live-in-hungary.html https://bytepawn.com/why-i-dont-live-in-hungary.html
Nursie 2y ago
Hungary is widely acknowledged to be in a state of nascent dictatorship anyway. I don’t think it really works to call out a potential slippery slope when the country is already overtly on that pathway. Those in power there can already operate with relative impunity. (This is the reason that when Trump says “Orban likes me!” it’s not actually a flex)
- rdm_blackhole 2y ago
  As per my comment above, this draft law has nothing to do with Hungary. The only reason Hungary is currently associated with the "Chat control" draft is because Hungary currently holds the EU presidency and as part of their mandate they are free to set goals and negotiate with other countries in order to come up with future laws. First, these drafts mostly originate from the EU commission, so Hungary is not the one who came out with it in the first place. Secondly, Belgium which had the presidency a couple of months ago also tried (and failed) to get this draft across the line. So yes, Hungary, which may or may not be on it's way to become a dictatorship is very happy to keep pushing for these negotiations to happen but let's also take a moment and remember that Sweden, France, Spain and many more countries are also happy with it. So to me, the question is how can we take EU countries seriously when they talk about privacy when so many of them are ready to create a system of blanket surveillance on all their citizens?
  - Nursie 2y ago
    > So to me, the question is how can we take EU countries seriously when they talk about privacy when so many of them are ready to create a system of blanket surveillance on all their citizens? Well I guess they draw a distinction between allowing state-level actors to access information in the name of stopping crimes and/or national security concerns and allowing the same sort of access to commercial entities. I'm not saying that justifies it, but it's a different threat model - accessing data about your own citizens for state reasons, rather than collecting data about everyone for commercial gain. Let's hope it gets knocked back again.
    - rdm_blackhole 2y ago

worstspotgain 2y ago

Hungary's is one of Putin's puppet regimes, so it's really about Russian-style repression of the opposition.

rdm_blackhole 2y ago
You obviously have not read about this piece of legislation otherwise you would not have posted this comment. The law in question also dubbed "chat control" has been on the table for the last 3 years now. It's been rejected each time so far but it comes back every 6 months without fail. The reason Hungary is associated with "Chat control" this time is because Hungary holds the current presidency of the EU. This presidency changes every 6 months. Before Hungary, it was Belgium which was in charge and they too tried to get this law passed. This is what a country with the EU presidency does, they set their goals and then try to reach a consensus with the other countries. "Chat control" is one of these goals just like it was one of the goals of the Belgium presidency. So to come out and say the Hungary is pushing for this because they are Putin's puppet is not accurate at all. The EU commission, which I am pretty sure no one can accuse of being a puppet of Putin is the one who keep bringing this law not Hungary or a specific country in particular. Now, I am not saying that Hungary is not happy about this, in fact they may well be very glad that this law is being discussed (as it would allow them to enable a state of total surveillance on their citizens) but please let's remember that even Sweden and Spain are amongst the many countries in the EU that are actually supporting this law. To me that is the bigger problem, how can the EU be so supportive of personal privacy then come out with shit like this?
- worstspotgain 2y ago
  Sure, but you're drawing a distinction without a functional difference. The following can both be true: - Hungary's Putin-puppet regime is in favor of banning encryption so as to repress the opposition and stay in power indefinitely. - Other EU political actors are in favor of banning encryption for their own reasons. My comment did not imply that all non-puppet political actors in the EU were against banning encryption.
  - rdm_blackhole 2y ago
    > Hungary's is one of Putin's puppet regimes, so it's really about Russian-style repression of the opposition Your first comment was vague and that is why I thought it was worth responding to it. I am glad we agree that Hungary is not the only one who is pushing for this law but you singled out Hungary in your comment so what was the intent there then? To be honest, I am just a bit fed up with people talking about Hungary as the bad guy in this particular instance due to it's ties with Putin all the while forgetting that even the "nice" and "progressive" countries such as Sweden and France and many others which are usually clamoring for privacy and sovereignty from big tech are also pushing for it. To me in this specific case Hungary is not the problem. The problem is the law itself and the fact that this law keeps coming back again and again in the so called bastion of democracy that is Europe (supposedly).
  - 123yawaworht456 2y ago
    - Hungary's Putin-puppet regime is in favor of banning encryption to repress the opposition = bad - Other EU political actors are in favor of banning encryption to repress the opposition = good
  - aguaviva 2y ago
    Hungary's Putin-puppet regime This may feel nifty to say and/or believe in, but has no connection to reality. Source: any Magyar you will talk to. Edit: For example [0], posted 5 minutes after I posted this. [0] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41625251 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41625251
hulitu 2y ago
Maybe, but this was started by the Biden's puppet regimes.
Maro 2y ago
> Hungary's is one of Putin's puppet regimes I'm Hungarian, I hate Orban [1], but your comment is not accurate. We have a lot of problems in Hungary (see my other comment in the thread), but we're not Putin's puppet regime. A puppet regime would imply that Orban was put in place by Putin and/or is kept in place by Putin, and is purely doing Putin's bidding. I've never heard anybody serious say this, nor have I ever seen any evidence of this. Although rhetorically Orban is definitely pro-Russia, in the end (after wasting everybody's time for a while) he always goes along with EU resolutions against Russia. Orban doesn't need Putin to stay in power, he has access to all of Hungary's tax income, and effectively also beyond that, due to the 2/3 majority which allows him to rewrite the constitution at will. Likely reasons Orban is friendly with Putin: (i) access to Russian oil (ii) Hungary's one and only power plant is Russian tech run by Russian techs (iii) Orban's regime is like a soft version of Putin's, so criticizing Putin would in some sense mean critizing himself, it'd be counter-productive for him. [1] https://bytepawn.com/why-i-dont-live-in-hungary.html https://bytepawn.com/why-i-dont-live-in-hungary.html

Nursie 2y ago

Hungary is widely acknowledged to be in a state of nascent dictatorship anyway. I don’t think it really works to call out a potential slippery slope when the country is already overtly on that pathway. Those in power there can already operate with relative impunity. (This is the reason that when Trump says “Orban likes me!” it’s not actually a flex)

rdm_blackhole 2y ago
As per my comment above, this draft law has nothing to do with Hungary. The only reason Hungary is currently associated with the "Chat control" draft is because Hungary currently holds the EU presidency and as part of their mandate they are free to set goals and negotiate with other countries in order to come up with future laws. First, these drafts mostly originate from the EU commission, so Hungary is not the one who came out with it in the first place. Secondly, Belgium which had the presidency a couple of months ago also tried (and failed) to get this draft across the line. So yes, Hungary, which may or may not be on it's way to become a dictatorship is very happy to keep pushing for these negotiations to happen but let's also take a moment and remember that Sweden, France, Spain and many more countries are also happy with it. So to me, the question is how can we take EU countries seriously when they talk about privacy when so many of them are ready to create a system of blanket surveillance on all their citizens?
- Nursie 2y ago
  > So to me, the question is how can we take EU countries seriously when they talk about privacy when so many of them are ready to create a system of blanket surveillance on all their citizens? Well I guess they draw a distinction between allowing state-level actors to access information in the name of stopping crimes and/or national security concerns and allowing the same sort of access to commercial entities. I'm not saying that justifies it, but it's a different threat model - accessing data about your own citizens for state reasons, rather than collecting data about everyone for commercial gain. Let's hope it gets knocked back again.
  - rdm_blackhole 2y ago