Unbelievably stupid. Horrible overreach of government power.
In the USA our founding fathers wrote the constitution to limit government, not citizens. For sure, we have strayed away from this ideal, but things here are not as bad as apparently they are in the EU.
One of the main politicians behind this is Swedish Social Democrat Ylva Johansson[1]; coming from a party with a long history of political surveillance[2]. Unlike East Germany, Sweden has never “dealt” with this past. She thinks this is how it should be.
Read the USAs "Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act" of 1994, it may change your mind. An FBI document from 2021 foiad by the property of the people org shows the FBI abilities to get information from encrypted messengers, which, simplified, shows that end2end encrypted services run by american corporations have backdoors for the american government. Which surprises no one, except patriots who never heard of the patriot act of 2001.
You're sending out masked gangs to grab people into vans to be trafficked overseas without due process or oversight. But sure, it's the EU with the overreach issues.
The whataboutism is completely, stupidly useless for dealing with this being a shitty, control-grabbing bit of cotton-gloved authoritarianism from the grey apparatchiks of the Union government.
Because the current administration of the U.S is creating its own legal monstrosities, people should just clam up about a complete grab on communications privacy from another major government?
The last 50 times this was proposed it was rejected and I don't know why you think this time will be different. If it was proposed in the USA, it'd already be law by now (in fact it is already law in the USA), and to be struck down 6 months later by a sane supreme court (so not this one).
I don't understand why they keep trying this over and over. It can't possibly be a moral crusade as it keeps happening with different players, but I don't understand the purpose.
We now live in a world where the opposite routinely happens: a crime happens, you give the police access to Apple or Google's Find Device / Find My data, they throw it in the trash. Law enforcement has more data to find and procecute criminals than they have time. People get scammed out of money by the thousands every day, over the phone, an insanely easy system to tap and trace. No one gets arrested.
Who is actually repeatedly pushing for things like these within the EU? For what purpose? What crimes went unprocecuted because of the unability to perform mass surveillance like this? It seems that all the time, when law enforcement actually cares about, it's trivial for them to get evidence? So why does this keep popping up every year?
I really don't, what is the answer? I assume higher ups at law enforcement, who are detached from the day-to-day operations, make up excuses about "end to end encryption being a challenge" because it's a meme, much like execs in our fields parrot "challenges" to boards and VC investors that are often fully removed from actual execution issues.
And then because it comes up in slides so much at that higher level, politicians actually start thinking that's why we haven't solved all crime, our guys are competent and clearly they're not understaffed, it's that pesky "not being able to break end to end encryption" that is preventing law enforcement from doing their work!
It's sad to see Europe's influence fading, and instead of investing in innovation, politicians are focused on stripping even more freedoms from their citizens.
a rich and fascinating history. If i may recommend a wikipedia article: "Cabinet Noir", which includes: "by the 1700s, cryptanalysis was becoming industrialized"
The EU just doesn’t have the tech muscle to make this happen now or ever. They’re pros at cranking out regulations, but when it comes to the actual tech know-how, they’re kind of out of their depth.
I was thinking the same. Plus who cares, I or probably most people here can encrypt their own data. If I were ever to send things to the "cloud", it would be encrypted on my local system first by me before uploading it.
If this is enabled, all they will get to see is LOL cats, data they would really want to see will still be invisible to them.
Any legislative body keeps making legislature, yes, that's what it does.
Most legislative bodies make a lot of legislature that keeps things away from people, like GDPR. That's "authoritarian" if by "authoritarian" you mean "more legislation". If by "authoritarian" you mean "more interference with people's lives" then it's actually anti-authoritarian.
Readit News
In the USA our founding fathers wrote the constitution to limit government, not citizens. For sure, we have strayed away from this ideal, but things here are not as bad as apparently they are in the EU.
1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ylva_Johansson?wprov=sfti1#Sur...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IB_affair?wprov=sfti1
Because the current administration of the U.S is creating its own legal monstrosities, people should just clam up about a complete grab on communications privacy from another major government?
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44168134 ("EU Commission refuses to disclose authors behind its mass surveillance proposal", 292 comments)
We now live in a world where the opposite routinely happens: a crime happens, you give the police access to Apple or Google's Find Device / Find My data, they throw it in the trash. Law enforcement has more data to find and procecute criminals than they have time. People get scammed out of money by the thousands every day, over the phone, an insanely easy system to tap and trace. No one gets arrested.
Who is actually repeatedly pushing for things like these within the EU? For what purpose? What crimes went unprocecuted because of the unability to perform mass surveillance like this? It seems that all the time, when law enforcement actually cares about, it's trivial for them to get evidence? So why does this keep popping up every year?
And then because it comes up in slides so much at that higher level, politicians actually start thinking that's why we haven't solved all crime, our guys are competent and clearly they're not understaffed, it's that pesky "not being able to break end to end encryption" that is preventing law enforcement from doing their work!
Also a state where a police makes the laws is called a police state.
For example, East Germany was a police state, so Europe has a rich history on the topic.
If this is enabled, all they will get to see is LOL cats, data they would really want to see will still be invisible to them.
Most legislative bodies make a lot of legislature that keeps things away from people, like GDPR. That's "authoritarian" if by "authoritarian" you mean "more legislation". If by "authoritarian" you mean "more interference with people's lives" then it's actually anti-authoritarian.
The only authoritarian moves are the ones by radical right national parties in the member states of the EU.
He got the message out there, we just didn't listen.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_McLuhan#Legacy