4 ms·
>the most powerful parties behind Chat Control are all backed by the U.S. Of course the US would benefit from EU's chat control. Duh! Nothing eye opening in y
by FirmwareBurner 1y ago
>the most powerful parties behind Chat Control are all backed by the U.S.
Of course the US would benefit from EU's chat control. Duh! Nothing eye opening in your comment. That's like being surprised the shovel makers benefit from a gold rush. If the EU started the demand, the US will happily supply because otherwise someone else will.
However, my biggest problem as an EU citizen is the fact that the EU is implementing chat control in the first, not that the US is happily supplying it since the US government is not accountable to me, but sadly it seems mine isn't either.
> and never targeting U.S. policy-makers in the first place
Why would they shit where they eat or bite the hand that feeds them?
- tucnak 1y agoThe point is the EU would never attempt implementing Chat Control if it weren't for U.S. constant meddling in the matter. You could make a case that the U.S. spooks are the ones politically implementing Chat Control in the first place! It's hard to blame EU bureaucrats. The U.S. doesn't export SIGINT, it simply DOES it, and at best throws its friends a few bones once in a while. There is no organic demand for this shit in the EU. US lobbying just finds a way, and the U.S. spooks are simply too good at disguising clandestine activities as lobbying. I find it hard to root for this kind of interference.
- FirmwareBurner 1y ago>The point is the EU would never attempt implementing Chat Control if it weren't for U.S. constant meddling in the matter. 100% false. It's not like the EU is some tiny third world banana republic under US colonialism that has zero say in how it runs its domestic affairs. So please let's start holding our own politicians accountable for their actions instead of moving the blaming to external factors we can't control since accountability is their biggest enemy. > It's hard to blame EU bureaucrats. It is VERY easy to blame them, I'm doing it right now because they're MY civil servants paid from MY taxes and should do what's best for me. They can easily drop the chat control if they want to. But they won't because they made unpopular decisions in the last ~20 years that ended up negatively affecting the working class population, so democracy and freedom of speech is now a threat to them so they seek to control what I see and what I say so they protect their wealth, status and power.
- tucnak 1y agoYou give politicians far too much credit. There is one driving force behind all Chat Control legislation, and it's the U.S. This is established fact. The only reason it hasn't been passed in the EU is precisely because EU citizens are fighting it. On a different note, to speak of accountability in 2025 is a bit silly: there's none, and it's been like this for years. I dislike EU politicians as much as the next guy, but the real issue is not that they govern too much, it's that they govern too little, and have very little appetite for actual governing. (I subscribe to view of Dominic Cummings on the matter.) This is the reason why they'd allowed themselves to be overrun by the U.S.
- FirmwareBurner 1y ago>You give politicians far too much credit I'm not. The goal of all politicians in every country is to manage public opinion so they can keep their seats, it's that simple. And EU politicians they finally realized how important control over internet media and speech is to managing that public option, so they'll seek to control it like the state controls TV broadcasting. >There is one driving force behind all Chat Control legislation, and it's the U.S. There's no evidence for this. EU politicians are the ones pushing for this to "save the children" or to "prevent fascism" lol. >but the real issue is not that they govern too much, it's that they govern too little Why not both? They govern too much on useless bullshit that hurts the economic competitiveness, and then govern too little on the things we need them for like sustainable policies for welfare, education, housing, immigration, birth rates, etc.