Basically, the same as before re: invasive searches of your property except now surrounded by weasel wording so it seems voluntary but won't be. But the same mandatory dox'ing yourself for future corporate leaks.
If such a mandate is given, a trilogue between Commission, Council and EU Parliament usually starts.
It is basically a regulatory union, constructed so as to transpose power to the center, then hold it there.
It can't allow the people to have too much say, as that is "populism", which gets in the way of the bureaucracy doing its thing.
The only way to end / prevent this proposal from being repeated until "success" is to pass another treaty entrenching that something like Chat Control is forbidden.
That is an extremely low probability event, and gets lower as more member states join.
That'll work about as well as "shall pass no law", "papers and effects" and "infringed".
You gotta mean it. Everyone's gotta mean it. And by mean it I mean make peace with all the potential bad things that entails.
>to try and try and try ... against all odds. Doesn't make any sense to discuss that on a bi-yearly basis.
This is quite naive. These people know what they are doing and it isn't too uncommon to consider certain packages of law multiple times.
Privacy or bust.
Also it requires everyone to ID themselves in chat apps so that they can be determined to not be a minor which will kill anonymous chatting :(
https://www.patrick-breyer.de/en/eu-chat-control-proposal-st...
Used to be that you could get pretty decent amounts of both in pretty rich nations but not anymore.
You realise this hasn’t passed, right? It’s a proposal.
Seriously you should look to yourself and what you guys have actually passed into law before you start throwing stones at others.
Basically, the EU gives you the rules up front and the USA decides after the fact.
My point is that there is zero chance of this unpopular legislation being repealed once the EU have forced it through.
I would rather take my chances in a sovereign parliamentary democracy. I know the UK has draconian anti privacy laws on the statute books and have retained a lot of EU rules by default. But we still cling to the belief that parliaments cannot bind the hands of future parliaments, and we expect manifestos to be published and debated prior to elections. A lot of this has been pushed to the background while the UK has been governed by incompetent untrustworthy technocrats cut from the same cloth as the Eurocrats they yearn to be, but a political tsunami is on the way. You can feel it. The globalist establishment will rage against it as ghastly Populism, but I see it as a renaissance of Democracy. It gives me hope that unpopular laws can be amended or repealed.
You seem to be a different person than I was replying to
> My point is...
No, that is your opinion. There is no evidence that this will ever be "forced" through in any form that would erode current rights.
> I would rather take my chances...
By all means do, although you may want to brush up on how legislation in your own country works...
Good luck getting your EU Commission to change their mind about something they really want. The "right" voting buttons will be pushed eventually. But I suspect you already know that.
And what exactly is that?
The widely discussed "Chat control" proposal has already been withdrawn. What remains is much narrower in scope. For instance, it no longer includes mandatory client-side scanning.
Over time, these kinds of proposals usually get watered down further until they either respect individual rights fully or fade away entirely, as has consistently happened with privacy-invasive initiatives in the past.
The only exception I can think of was the "Data Retention Directive" that was (eventually!) rejected by the ECJ - only for the UK to reimplement it after Brexit...
It's still unclear whether it really is removed. They turned scanning into something voluntary, and then said big chat providers must do _something_ to monitor abuse. It seems _very_ likely that the regulatory bodies/courts will decide that the bar they must clear to meet this "something" is client-side scanning.
And I agree that the regulation still has a lot of hoops to jump through to be implemented, and will likely be further tweaked. But it's _very_ important to keep raising our concerns, otherwise there will be no pressure to change the currently problematic legislation.
EVERYTHING is unclear, because they have literally only just received a negotiating mandate to discuss the idea. This isn't even a proposal that will reach parliament in its current form - its undergone near zero scrutiny because it simply hasn't progressed far enough to be scrutinised.
> It seems _very_ likely... client-side scanning
Actually, it seems almost completely UNLIKELY due to the protections afforded EU citizens. The last time legislation was passed that eroded privacy it was repealed by the ECJ (albeit many years later).
> it's _very_ important to keep raising our concerns
I totally agree
nickslaughter02•2mo ago