9 ms·
Who, exactly, is so strongly motivated to make such legislation? Who proposes it and drives it and lobbies for it? It doesn't come from nowhere.
by wewewedxfgdf 1y ago
Who, exactly, is so strongly motivated to make such legislation?
Who proposes it and drives it and lobbies for it? It doesn't come from nowhere.
- nicce 1y agoFor some reason names are sensored because of the ”privacy and security requirements.”
- nickslaughter02 1y agoFollow the money. AI surveillance companies like Thorn are shaking in excitement. https://balkaninsight.com/2023/09/25/who-benefits-inside-the-eus-fight-over-scanning-for-child-sex-content/ https://balkaninsight.com/2023/09/25/who-benefits-inside-the...
- potato3732842 1y agoThe state itself. Any shred of rights or privacy has reduces it's ability and/or increases the cost of it doing what it deems worth doing.
- hungmung 1y agoThe state is a lecher.
- spit2wind 1y agoThis is a meme I see and don't fully understand. It seems to assume that the state isn't a democracy, yet the statement is usually applied to democracies like the US. Such statements don't make sense to me when it's the people who are the state, not some "other".
- sunshowers 1y agoThis is a classic principal-agent problem. The people are not the state in electoral/representative democracies, they merely elect agents that have their own beliefs and motivations.
- pessimizer 1y agoThe public have no effect on public policy in the US: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592714001595 https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592714001595
- ExoticPearTree 1y agoThe individual needs and the “needs of the state” are two very distinct things.
- fmbb 1y agoLobbyists from surveillance product companies. And law enforcement agencies.
- cm2187 1y agoWhat is extraordinary is that the idea that there shouldn't be a word exchanged between two individuals that the state cannot listen to was a Stasi wet dream. It is just shocking that western democracies that have held totalitarian regimes at bay for so long at great expense, are now going full big brother.
- pessimizer 1y ago> western democracies that have held totalitarian regimes at bay for so long Western democracies have consistently installed and protected totalitarian regimes.
- delusional 1y ago> Who, exactly, is so strongly motivated to make such legislation? For the part that Denmark is playing, I think the answer is somewhat readily found in the current national politics of Denmark. We've just had a pretty prominent politician 7 years ago get convicted of being in possession of CSAM. I think that's very personally offensive to our current prime minister. That has to be viewed along with her personal view of herself as the "children's prime minister", to make it into a double whammy. We've also been dealing an inability of the police to investigate some crime, and the investigative committee established to figure out what to do about it recommended an ability for police to more readily be able to investigate digital material. I imagine the current policymakers imagine Chat Control to play a part of enabling that at a national level.
- wewewedxfgdf 1y agoAh yes, "protecting the children". Meme driven politics.
- delusional 1y ago> Meme driven politics. It's very much NOT meme driven. We're generally very sensitive to child abuse in Denmark, and even singular cases are usually enough to establish pretty wide bureaucratic systems. Originally, she launched the "branding" push when they were talking about schools and daycare, but like all branding it spills out into other avenues. I have no doubt she weighs her job around children particularly important. It's not at all a stretch to me to say that she probably genuinely wanted her party colleague, and CSAM enjoyer, caught faster, and I don't doubt that she believes this is the best way to do that. That's not a "meme". That's policy driven by observation and factual cases.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- shaky-carrousel 1y agoThe road to hell is paved with good intentions.
- Quekid5 1y agoIt's surveillance companies, i.e. follow the money. Imagine if you can force every IM app to include your nonsense? BILLIONS of instant installs and subscription fees. The EU ombudsman actually asked the EU Council to comply with a Freedom of Information request about who attended the meetings about this and all we got was a fully redacted PDF with a list of about 30-40 individuals/groups (literally blacked out in the PDF). It's absurd how non-transparently this is bought & paid for.
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago> follow the money. Imagine if Following the money requires actually following money. Not imagined money. Do we have evidence of these companies lobbying for CharControl?
- Quekid5 1y agoIt was redacted ... and very obviously so. Did you read my post?
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- JumpCrisscross 1y agoAttendees can hint at money. But it isn’t money. The lack of transparency is problematic per se. But it doesn’t advance your argument that the redacted groups are the ones you suspect.
- Quekid5 1y agoI take your point. There were some previous leaked docs about Thorn involvement (I'm pretty sure Palantir was mentioned in those docs, but not 100% sure), so yeah... The biggest issue is the lack of transparency about the people/groups involved in those meetings and why this ineffectual privacy-destroying idiocy gets pushed so hard.
- 1y ago
- dariosalvi78 1y agoSwedes and Danes are at the forefront. The truth is that Scandinavian societies are much more authoritarian and illiberal than they want people to believe.
- miohtama 1y ago[flagged]
- henearkr 1y ago[flagged]
- swinglock 1y agoYou sure know a lot about socialism and words, for someone that doesn't know that these social democrats are called so because it's literally the name of their parties.
- henearkr 1y agoWell you sure know a lot about words, but could you change or rearrange them please, because right know I have trouble to make sense of your comment :/
- swinglock 1y agoThey are socialists. It's not a slur.
- henearkr 1y agoOk, thank you, that's clearer. But the whole point, on my side, is to emphasize that in some cases "socialist" means "authoritarian communist" (that's been only when the word is used by some Americans) and in some cases (the most of the time e.g. if you are dialoguing with somebody from Europe) it means something else. See my other comments for more.
- macmac 1y agoOur "minister of Justices" is a scared little boy, deeply traumatised by a childhood characterised by the lack of a basic sense of safety. This trauma has never been addressed and with age he has unfortunately become a politician and earned a law degree. His rational faculties and academic degree are of course a faint echo compared to his childhood trauma, so he has no reservations destroying any personal liberty in the name of safety. I feel deeply for the boy, but fear the man.
- cco 1y agoTo whom are you referring? A quick Google didn't reveal which minister from which country you're talking about but I'm curious to learn more.
- wickedsickeune 1y agoRefers to the minister of justice in Denmark, Peter Hummelgaard. I don't know his childhood though.
- varispeed 1y agoIt is corruption, paranoia and addiction to power. The problem is agencies that are supposed to crack down on these things do nothing or are corrupt themselves.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- crimsoneer 1y agoIt might seem alien to the regular HN commenter, but for most politicians/bureaucrats/law enforcement folk, the last ten years or so of widespread encrypted comms are an anomaly, and a bad one. The idea that the state is mathematically blocked from reading certain communications, even with a court order, really pushes back against the very concept of a supremely sovereign national state.