Discussion summary
Debate surrounds the EU's proposed ban on the AfD party, with concerns about its far-right views and potential implications for democracy.
What the discussion says
- Some see AfD as a neo-Nazi or far-right threat, advocating for deportations and revoking citizenship.
- Others argue the party's opposition to chat control is exaggerated or misrepresented.
- Critics express skepticism about the effectiveness and motives behind EU regulations.
- Some commenters view the ban as a threat to freedom and democratic principles.
“AfD is a far-right neofascist party hostile to democracy.”
“The party wants to revoke citizenship and expel certain groups.”
Join the discussion
Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.
- Hacker News
- So many messages about child safety in the press and even here... Who cares about chat control when they already have mind control.by rixed
- by iamyemeth
- Chat control 1.0
"A temporary derogation from the ePrivacy Directive that allowed (but did not require) providers to scan private messages of unsuspected users for potential child sexual abuse material."
Does that imply it's currently not allowed?
EDIT: apparently not enforced at least:
"Chat Control 1.0 expires
The legal ground for voluntary, indiscriminate scanning ends. Google, Meta, Microsoft, and Snap state they will continue scanning private messages regardless. "
by olejorgenb - The same governments pushing for this type of regulation are also the ones that fail to condemn high profile individuals involved in the crimes that these regulation are supposed to help fight. Makes you really wonder if it's about protecting the children.by keraf
- They claim to protect consumers and privacy and then push this creepy surveillance state.
- > Is scanning mandatory? - No — voluntary.
Voluntary for whom? The service provider? Can I opt out of getting scanned?
> Does it touch encrypted messages? - No. End-to-end encrypted communications were never scanned but providers could deploy client-side scanning under this law.
So it circumvents e2e encryption?
---
How would these laws prevent me from just side loading my own open source client?
by worldsayshi - I don't understand. How does it affect encrypted messages? It seems like either you need:
1. allow MITM decryption by a privileged authority
2. require all devices doing E2EE have a non-user-modifiable piece of functionality to scan on-device
The second is the Apple style on-device CSAM scanner? I have to say that I do sometimes think about it while taking a photo of my baby playing in the bathtub - photos like my parents have of me which have been kind of nice to see later. It would be a pity if I had to have a separate analog camera just for baby photos because then I'd need to learn the whole developing film stuff.
by arjie - Most everyone would love to see more work on stopping child sexual abuse.
But this is the ultimate "grant me dictatorial powers so I can do good" play.
Rather than narrow and specific - it's a broad based law that suddenly touches everyone even though offenders are a small percentage and should be able to be targeted more efficiently.
by mikaeluman