Birbla

Discussion summary

The EU Parliament approved Chat Control 1.0, raising concerns about privacy and rights. Critics argue it favors big tech and undermines liberties, while supporters cite child protection.

What the discussion says

  • Critics say it erodes privacy and rights.
  • Supporters claim it helps protect children from abuse.
  • Some see it as a necessary compromise for safety.
  • Concerns about government and corporate overreach.
“Our children lose out”
— Breyer
“Big Brother loves us”
— miroljub

Join the discussion

Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.

Sign in
  • Hacker News
  • This, and other similar legislation, serve as a constant reminder of why the American founding fathers had to revolt against tyranny, and why constitution amendments like the 1st and 4th exist. The 4th in particular was written as a response to a British law similar to Chat Control (writs of assistance).
    by tasn
  • Instead of solving real problems, the EU Parliament supports the globalists' agenda for privacy and human rights violations — our fundamental rights
    by aw124
  • I don't want to hear about the EU's "strong digital privacy" laws and protections ever again.
    by petcat
  • Roberta Metsola's actions this week jeopardise the legitimacy of the EU project as a whole.

    It's clear that member countries use the EU as a blame-laundering mechanism to pass domestically unpopular laws, but the forcing of this vote under the urgency procedure that requires absolute majority to reject, on the last EP session before summer break is so blatant that it might awaken people that might've overlooked the structural failures of the EU and finally radicalise them

    EDIT: bad wording, it's not that the urgency procedure causes the voting to require absolute majority, it's that an absolute majority second-reading is forced through an emergency procedure which is designed for first readings of legislation that's the implied meaning above

    by budududuroiu
  • This is a nice piece of democracy right here:

    "a measure it had rejected twice in March. Although a majority of voting Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) actually opposed the regulation (314 against, 276 in favor, 17 abstentions), the motion to reject it failed to secure the required absolute majority of 361 votes. As a result, mass scanning is now permitted again until 2028."

    "Oh no we can't get a majority to pass the law!"

    "Have you tried getting a majority to not pass the law?"

    "Worth a shot!"

    "It worked, should we also do this multiple times?"

    "Of course not! Pass the law, quickly!"

    by teekert
  • Stupid parliamentary trick: Hold the vote on the day before the summer break - ensuring that many people have already returned to their home countries. Then use a sort of "reverse" parliamentary trick: the default is that this legislation is accepted. They needed an absolute majority - not of voting members, but of all members - to reject it.

    Result: 314 against, 276 in favor, 17 abstentions, 113 absent

    The EU is well on the way to becoming a totalitarian government.

    ETA: It is shocking that 276 members of parliament would vote to support this. Are so many so naive? Or being paid off?

    by bradley13
  • FTA:

    What changes with the return of Chat Control 1.0—and what stays the same:

    *What is coming back:* US tech companies are once again allowed to scan private messages without a warrant or prior suspicion. This affects direct messages on platforms like Instagram, Discord, Snapchat, Skype, and Xbox, as well as emails via Google’s Gmail and Apple’s iCloud.

    *What remains unchanged:* Public social media posts and files hosted in cloud storage could already be scanned without this law. Furthermore, private messages can always be reported by users, or monitored by authorities using targeted, court-ordered wiretapping.

    *What is still NOT being scanned:* End-to-end encrypted chats, such as those on WhatsApp, have always been exempt from these scans. Additionally, European providers of messaging and email services have never implemented chat control measures.

    So, E2E is unaffected?

    by mrtksn
  • The EU is a farce, an undemocratic virtue signaling organization, and this is why:

    - The Parliament voted against the first reading of this proposal twice in 2026, the first time they only supported limited cases for it, while the second time they actually defeated it fully.

    - The Commission didn't care, and kept the proposal on the table by refusing to withdraw it.

    - Once the Commission does that, the proposal goes on second-reading (despite the first-reading having defeated it) and it is established in a very PERVERSE way in EU law that to AVOID passing the proposal in second-reading you need ABSOLUTE majority which is incredibly hard to pursue (you would think that we would need an absolute majority to PASS a proposal that was previously defeated on first-reading, not instead needing absolute majority to DENY a previously defeated proposal that was again forced to the table).

    - Furthermore, absences in practicality count as "No" on the rejection. So of course they scheduled the vote in the summer when notoriously there will be many absences.

    By never withdrawing a defeated proposal they can effectively and in practicality pursue any agenda they want (it requires a massive mobilization effort to find absolute majority to defeat any proposal, especially when absences for any reason effectively count against rejection).

    In PRACTICALITY, the Commission can pursue any agenda whenever and however they want, and throw the votes down the drain.

    EU's democracy is lipstick on a pig.

    by fosk

Explore Birbla archives