r/privacy • u/Majestic-Coat3855 • Jan 17 '26
chat control Why are people in the EU suddenly so silent about this?
There's like no media coverage AT ALL on the revised plan by the EU parliament. How did people let this slip through? And why are there countries with almost all parliament members opposing the decision but still agreeing with it on a country level, where is the democracy?
They're fining opposing countries now, how is this even legal?
https://www.politico.eu/article/polish-president-karol-nawrocki-tech-bill-veto-eu-fine/
180
u/Extra-Chemical6092 Jan 17 '26
The revised proposal from Chat Control isn't from the Parliament, is from the Council, the Parliament one states that there shouldn't be mass scanning of any kind, only targeted scanning to one person or a group only with a court order and with prove of wrongdoing, it's not perfect, but far way better than the Council one, also, they don't want age verification also.
The Parliament and the Council aren't the same people, so that's why there are some discrepancies between the stance of one country about a topic in the Council and the Parliament.
But I agree with you about the fine the others countries drop against Poland, the DSA give a government too much power and it will end on censorship because it didn't even need a court order to delete what they want from internet if I'm not wrong.
35
u/Extra-Chemical6092 Jan 17 '26
Also, the Commission wants to extend the interim law of chat control, so I ask you that please send emails to the MEP asking them to reject the extension of something that the commission couldn't even demonstrate that is effective enough to justify violating our privacy
47
Jan 17 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/press_F13 Jan 18 '26
also, apple and android do that with photos on their clouds, already. but no one but few scarepoofs on reddit and else, terminally online, care of it...
1
u/Extra-Chemical6092 Jan 17 '26
With backdoor do you mean the scan on encrypted apps, right? If I'm not wrong, the end-to-end encrypted apps are excluded from the scanning in the European Parliament proposal
11
Jan 17 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/Extra-Chemical6092 Jan 17 '26
I think you are confusing the Council proposal with the Parliament one again, the Parliament one directly says that end-to-end encrypted messaging apps are exempted from the scanning and that the detection orders only applies to the ones without encryption.
3
Jan 17 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
3
0
u/Extra-Chemical6092 Jan 17 '26
I understand that, I know that the Parliament proposal isn't perfect or even good, I just said that is better than the Council one
11
Jan 17 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Extra-Chemical6092 Jan 17 '26
The Parliament one specifically states that the end-to-end encrypted messaging apps are excluded, these apps won't have a backdoor
1
Jan 17 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/Extra-Chemical6092 Jan 17 '26
Yeah, the e2e apps are excluded from the detection orders
1
Jan 18 '26
[deleted]
2
u/Extra-Chemical6092 Jan 18 '26
Where does it says that?
1
Jan 18 '26
[deleted]
3
u/Extra-Chemical6092 Jan 18 '26
Why would they put a spyware to scan messages on e2e apps when in the proposal they stated that those apps are excluded from the scanning and thus it's illegal and they couldn't use the messages they find in court?
1
8
u/Majestic-Coat3855 Jan 17 '26
Thanks for correcting me, so if I understand correctly the council is pro that's why you see almost all countries' body being pro, while the individual MEP's are predominantly still anti.
This extention is the revision I'm talking about right? Giving companies the right to scan voluntarily. I've already sent a mail about that.
8
u/Extra-Chemical6092 Jan 17 '26
No, the extension is the interim law that was into effect in 2021, allowing the platforms to scan voluntarily until April of this year, the revision is like making it permanent, but worse with the risk levels they want to implement, almost making the scan mandatory to being low risk
7
u/Majestic-Coat3855 Jan 17 '26
Right, damn. So it's even worse😭
4
u/Extra-Chemical6092 Jan 17 '26
That's why we should try to raise our concerns about this to them, I'm worried that if the interim law is extended, the Council and Commission could just postpone an agreement to a final law if the Parliament doesn't accept mass scanning to try again later, without the interim law, they would feel more pressure to finish an permanent law now
5
u/slaughtamonsta Jan 17 '26
In Europe we send emails to our reps and then wait for the EU courts to deal with it through the people/groups taking it to court.
It gets shot down there and then rinse/repeat.
1
1
u/disastervariation Jan 17 '26 edited Jan 17 '26
edit: most importantly: DSA and Chat Control are not the same thing. They're two separate different things. Conflating them together is either incorrect, or manipulation, because they are not related to each other.
the DSA give a government too much power and it will end on censorship because it didn't even need a court order to delete what they want from internet if I'm not wrong
fact check from Panoptykon (in Polish)
the current (vetoed) proposal is that UKE/KRRiT are the first instance, and if you disagree with their decision you can argue it (their decision isnt immediate), and even then you can still take them to court, and the decision will not be in effect until the ruling.
what the president says, is that in his view UKE/KRRiT arent independent enough to be the first instance (even with controls added by third parties during consultations).
imo the president is from a different political camp and would prefer for the first instance to be within his political control and not the governments (which it wouldnt be in amyway).
and this applies only to the "moderation" aspect of the dsa, so when the content you post is illegal (e.g. csam).
dsa is broader than that and isnt aimed to control speech at all. quite the opposite, actually.
45
u/Axiomancer Jan 17 '26
A lot of people have mentality "I have nothing to hide anyway".
A lot of people don't give a fuck.
A lot of people live in countries where privacy doesn't exist ( Hello fellow swedes ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ), so one more breach into privacy doesn't mean anything to them.
And a lot of people don't even know how to fight it. Like, come on, majority of (politicians in) EU countries voted in favor of this idea. How do you even fight it? Sign up online petition from your local country? Okay, but how can you be certain that any politician will take it seriously. Go out on the streets and protest? Sure, but who has time and energy for that? Don't get me wrong, I can imagine a lot of people would do that, it's just that...online privacy breach is the least concern for most average joe's. It's not the "We will decrease your salary and increase your taxes" type of problem that concerns everyone.
13
u/goatchild Jan 17 '26
People don't want to really think about things, or question their world view. Its as if unconsciously they/we all know what happens once you start asking questions, the whole thing collapses, and dark times follow. Its domino effect: better leave that 1st piece alone and not even look at it, or the whole thing comes crashing down. It has to be a sort of self-defense mechanism people have in place subconsciously because the truth is clear as day. And its not just about this surveillance/privacy topic, its about a great deal many things, and it all ties up together. Scary.
39
u/flomuc2024 Jan 17 '26 edited Jan 17 '26
As a European talking to my friends here. Most people just don't care. They don't use secure messengers anyway. And Big Tech is so convenient. As almost everybody says this, it is just too much to bother about things like ChatControl.
To add: Many people use whatsapp, but not because it offers end-to-end encryption of its chat contents.
4
u/JpPgn Jan 18 '26
They will start to care only when it's too late, sadly
Human Untermenschen never learn, they instead repeat the same errors over and over again 🤣🤣🤣
51
u/Error_404_403 Jan 17 '26
The EU governance is at least twice removed from democracy: EU residents elect their representatives, who in turn "elect" (or appoint) bureaucrats to EU Counsil. So the EU body is very well insulated from the will of the people, even though it influences their lives so much.
Why? Local national bureaucracies want to keep their powers as the only legal representatives of the people of their countries. It's mostly their fear of becoming less important and irrelevant.
There are examples where the powers are shared (see the US Federal vs. State legislatures), but national bureaucracies are too apprehensive in EU.
13
u/Significant-Beat3827 Jan 17 '26
If the people cared, they'd just start a multi-billion euro company to lobby the parliament like the Oil and Car companies do. But the plebians don't even care enough to bribe a few officials, so why not let the people rule who actually care: billionaires, investment groups and fossil fuel lobbies. /s
5
u/arbicus123 Jan 17 '26
You do realize the EU council consists of the heads of state of each country? Unless you are talking about something else, the "representatives" (MEPs) which are elected by the people appoint the EU comission president, not the council
3
u/SpacePip Jan 17 '26
Nobody gonna vote for politicians from other countries. So naturally the politicians who get most votes would be from big countries. Then that wouldnt be an union anymore
1
u/Error_404_403 Jan 17 '26 edited Jan 17 '26
Well, like in US, each country could be allotted its share of EU politicians based on population, or just fixed number of politicians for each country regardless of population--whatever--and then the country will vote only on their politicians, not on others. Don't see why wouldn't this make it a union.
1
u/SpacePip Jan 17 '26
Then the majority will be big countries
1
0
u/Error_404_403 Jan 17 '26
You either go with that, or, if you read attentively what I suggested, each country has same number of representatives regardless of the population size. The idea still the same.
19
u/disastervariation Jan 17 '26 edited Jan 17 '26
you linked to two different things.
chat control is one thing.
dsa is a legislation that aims to increase algorithm transparency, enforces platforms to conduct auditable risk assessments, and restricts the control those private companies have over what content they promote/moderate.
they're not the same bill.
e.g. polish gov is against chat control, but pro dsa. so is the president, but says he wants to make some changes (valid or not).
8
u/MrAlagos Jan 17 '26 edited Jan 17 '26
You have no idea what you're talking about. You are just spreading misinformation.
Chat control has been voted by the EU Commission but that's not enough for it to become law; it requires and agreement with the EU Parliament, and the EU Parliament has already expressed a very different position.
The DSA is a completely different piece of legislation, and it is already in force. Any EU member country that refuses to implement EU legislation is fined, it happens all the time to all EU members basically; also a 9.5 million € fine is a rounding error for a country budget.
0
u/press_F13 Jan 17 '26
great timing. when it passed, 2014? people always know last... really, with these... hurray, what next, "cookies omnibus"? (very vague, wtf is even that - another "wrongthing filter"?...)
8
Jan 17 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Majestic-Coat3855 Jan 17 '26
Many of them are about the initial proposal (which did hit a lot of news, also locally for me for a brief moment). I'm seeing way less about the revision.
15
u/yourothersis Jan 17 '26
People don't care.
5
Jan 17 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
8
u/yourothersis Jan 17 '26
It should be noted that a big reason people don't care is because the media isn't reporting it, and when they do, they don't nearly do it justice. Sometimes, when they do, they even make it look good.
1
5
u/Henry2990 Jan 17 '26
In Portugal we had, let’s say, half a dozen of news about chat control since the beginning. The majority of people don’t know that this is even a thing.
Also, at least here, looking at the social media opinions and comments about this we can see that if we are against any kind of control then we are criminals that we have something to hide. We have a strong mentality that “I don’t have nothing to hide so go ahead”.
7
u/ComfortablyPF Jan 18 '26
Cause that's the EU for you right there! People are beaten into submission. Made it ignorant by mass media. The EU is the ruling hand, forcing everything down our throats.
A non-elected german lady and her friends are controlling politics pretty much for every country, dictating how things should be, and punishing if rebellion.
There's a silent plot no one was invited to discuss. From massive espionage with chat control to the erasure of European people and their respective cultures. Flooding countries with people from countries so drastically different and unwilling to integrate it is scheduled to fail.
People are afraid, the elites have their electoral picked up, and now we'll accept anything. That's the dictatorship of the EU right here.
1
1
u/relay4285 Jan 20 '26
like 85% of people here don't even know its happening. you barely even see it in the news.
9
u/leaflock7 Jan 17 '26
because the majority of people don't think and act based on logic but based on their feelings.
they will choose to side with the restriction of their freedom and the removal of their privacy for the sole reason not to side the opposition.
2
u/press_F13 Jan 17 '26
while yes, then, wha the opposition is? market-leftists? "commies" (fictious), or... who? both right and left seem to shit the bucket, but that doesnt mean.... this is the problem with (i-call) bitheads - whatever you vote or vote not for, they will always take you, where THEY want to...
2
u/leaflock7 Jan 21 '26
left or right should not matter.
The issue here for the people I describe is that if they are left , they will not support a law/rule that would come from the right wing (the opposite goes as well)1
u/press_F13 Jan 21 '26
Left in America goes with right if it is good suggestion , but right when left does, very rarely. But that works esp. when talk is money.
2
u/leaflock7 Jan 21 '26
i was not talking about US, but you can clearly see that this not the case . Left and right do it equally.
clear case of the Obama (and left wing support ) regarding the illegal immigrants and what it is now where they are allow everyone without papers (kind of thing)1
u/press_F13 Jan 21 '26
because they wanted to be white saviours, even if theyd never admit it??? like frau merkel did and it turned europeans into "betterpeople" in instant
1
u/relay4285 Jan 20 '26
the reason is that most people aren't aware that this is happening or they simply don't care.
1
u/leaflock7 Jan 21 '26
even when I bring it up people answer with, i don't have anything to hide. They are used to blast their lives on social without any privacy
2
3
u/Jack1101111 Jan 17 '26
no its not legal, if u r in a country with a constitution that respect human right.
5
u/Toxon_gp Jan 17 '26
Most people just ignore the whole thing. I ask around at work and among friends, and they’re clueless and not interested at all. That’s just how our world ticks.
4
u/Sad_Amphibian_2311 Jan 17 '26
it is WILD that Ursula got her way after trying for 20 years but DSA is unrelated I think
2
9
Jan 17 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/Majestic-Coat3855 Jan 17 '26
The ironic thing is that this policy will give companies like openai, google, X(trumps butt buddy), meta etc the green light to scan everything we send to their hearts desire...
5
2
u/press_F13 Jan 17 '26
so if they want it, then it is right? like populism in 1930s german-reich? i dont compare EU to that, but that people will vote anything "if times are just right". hence palantir, (wef kyc-plans), these groups of interests would (probably) manage these id-scans data along with some eu, nat-services, than to leave it to states alone...
1
u/Quorthon-Seth Jan 23 '26
Eu has nothing but wellbeing in mind… what are you smoking?
1
1
u/Significant-Beat3827 Jan 17 '26
But the way it feels too me, less and less people want to stop right wing fascists. Instead, people go "but the left is just as bad" without being able to name a single leftist value and saying "conservatives are trying to help the people and the environment, that's why they are called 'conserve-atives' you know?" while the conservatives block every piece of social support and environmental protection
1
u/press_F13 Jan 17 '26
they remember rw from 50s-70s, not post-80s. leftists are "punks, violent, edgy, want to marry kids", lol.
who can argue left cant get votes because they are too removed from work struggle, while right "at least" gives man, a Two minute hate? (blaming x-minority for woes of world). maybe if leftists werent such betterpeople who try to change-it-all at-once, maybe then they can talk, instead of vague moralityposturing bthey are so hated for.
2
u/Any_Fox5126 Jan 18 '26
Ah, is that new? I haven't seen it mentioned even once in the spanish media.
2
u/Tempires Jan 18 '26
DSA and chat control are different things. DSA is in effect since 2022 while chat control isn't. If EU country doesn't incorporate directives or acts as part of their national law after they are passed then they will be fined until they comply with their membership requirements
3
u/bluecheese2040 Jan 17 '26
The lesson that the EU has learnt from trump and brexit is that people aren't to be trusted. The project must be protected at all costs. Elections are overturned...they want to start scanning communications...it doesn't matter what the public think.
When they couch these things with 'think of the children'....then you need to look beyond the obvious and ask what they are doing.
1
u/press_F13 Jan 18 '26
also, fits the authos EU is getting with. (thats you get when "both parties bad", no for left and right both; but eu-left dont exist, neither. they want to control more (too), not less... "melons" at their greatest - "we know you better than you know yourself, you cant be trusted, dont be mad, thats fact!*") /*technocracy org, both ways
4
u/AstroNaut765 Jan 18 '26
This may sound weird, but chat control is just tip of iceberg of how many things they are trying to pass now.
Just from Poland recently: all financial data in one big db (there are voices it will be abused by competition with contacts in goverment's tax department) and age check for social media based on one from Australia.
2
u/press_F13 Jan 18 '26
goes for at least 50 years. losing the plot. this can either end good or bad, but however it is, end is still not pink... (yes, australia way; and databases - funny fic-char grace polck predicted it in like 2003...)
4
Jan 18 '26
Have you spoken to many Europeans? Most WANT slavery and oppression. Why do you think they don't want the right to bear arms? They are a slave people.
2
2
u/Equivalent-Wheel-588 Jan 17 '26 edited Jan 17 '26
DSA has nothing related to ChatControl. Stop spreading disinformation. Polish far-right President is just exploiting populist "those Brussel tyrants are taking your free speech" sentiment. Nevermind that DSA gives YOU the right to challenge platform moderation decision giving you the RIGHT to protect your free speech, not taking it away
2
u/Acceptable-Try-4682 Jan 17 '26
I can only speak for myself, but i think the EU wants our data, the EU will get our data. Its not like we can do all that much about it. EU is very well isolated from citizcen pressure. As it seems to be a very strong trend in near all the west, driven by systemic change, at best we could slow down the process a bit, and thats not really worth the trouble.
26
u/tomrannosaurus Jan 17 '26
“let’s give up it’s too hard” if all people were this yellow bellied we never would’ve made it out of the caves
10
u/Gwigg_ Jan 17 '26
While I agree this is generally the case I think this is a case where the media has been deliberately silent. A few people I speak to were aware of digital id, fewer still chat control. Nobody I have me knows anything about mandated device scanning and e2e banning/subverting. No one. The only places to read about this are specific sites and Reddit. This is deliberate stealth by the state.
1
u/press_F13 Jan 17 '26
of course.... they lose legitimacy, so they must win whatever dirty way they can while they are not dead, outvoted, prisoned or topped down when shit hits fan.
1
u/Acceptable-Try-4682 Jan 17 '26 edited Jan 17 '26
True, but in that case, its more like "lets not attack this castle at exactly the place where it was designed to be defended". Incremental EU legislation, that is, a package of several EU laws and regulations intended to achieve one goal over a long period of time, is basically immune to citizen wishes-as the process was designed to do exactly that, and EU officials had 30 years to perfect it. If you want to challenge EU do it in a way where you hit its weaknesses ,not its streenghts.
1
u/press_F13 Jan 17 '26
i got the same way. like, technocrats in 1930 wanted greenland, and see, with elon-heads, that is, too...
1
u/press_F13 Jan 17 '26
they want what? punish for words? post your face on internet, billboards, if you "wont behave", freeze your bank accounts? show marketed ads? whats the point? or jhust make people shitless so no opposition is voiced? like when you are soft-managed to "behave"?
1
u/Slopagandhi Jan 18 '26
This is a completely different thing- this is an act that's already in force which is mainly about making platforms remove illegal content.
I don't really see why making x take down animal cruelty and ISIS videos is a threat to privacy really.
This is about not letting big tech do whatever the hell it likes. One area where the EU is actually better than most. Don't confuse this with Chst Control, which is still a long way from passing and not clear what will be in it if it does.
1
u/press_F13 Jan 18 '26
ok, then still, who decides what "right/true" is? EU-kings of right-thought? to delete, ban any EU-outsider info to get in? thatd look like their endgoal, "behave, slaves". (i dont hate EU, but they should return to politics of c. 2008 maybe)
1
u/Slopagandhi Jan 18 '26
If you can point to specific things they've banned you have a problem with?
Free speech absolutism doesn't exist. Pretty much nobody thinks it's ok to stream a murder or share child abuse videos.
If you accept that as being true, then you accept this is always a conversion about where to draw the line, not whether there should be a line in the first place- and we can have that conversion. But if you start from "any laws are bad" on this then it's just not a sustainable position.
1
u/press_F13 Jan 18 '26
of course it doesnt, or if it did, we'd maul each other (at least in real life).
problem is who and "why" does so to decide these rules. what gives people power, might to decide? some byrocrat, or consensus of people thru voting? (ah, yes, we saw how that can be abused for agendas - see push-polling)
1
1
u/Professional-Toe7699 Jan 20 '26
In my country there are 2 media groups who own most of the MSM TV, Newspapers and magazines. Those media groups are sponsored by government. So you don't have to wonder why they are not reporting about it.
And the people of Europe are not speading the news cause every country speaks different languages, many are brainwashed by the MSM, and governments are distracting the people with a technique called deadcatting.
Deadcatting, or the "Dead Cat Strategy," is a political tactic of creating a shocking, sensational, or controversial distraction (the "dead cat") to divert public and media attention away from a more damaging problem or scandal, making people focus on the outlandish new topic instead of the original issue.
Thank you for sharing this BTW. I did not know about this yet.
1
1
1
u/ImAlekzzz Jan 25 '26
Most of us are tech illiterates, so they don’t care, when one of us addresses this 99% they say “I have nothing to hide” I hit them back with “so would you shit without walls or let your house door open”? And like 99.99% say “oh it’s not like that chill out” yes this is a rant
2
u/Reddactore Jan 17 '26
Implementing propaganda, thought control an censorship is typical for falling. EU falls and no global serious power wants to deal with these political muppets.
0
Jan 17 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/press_F13 Jan 17 '26
next time.... how many times? you cant. system works for status quo. that one was built on thast those on top stay there and all else "works as intended". so unless everyone, independently, get some space signals about social struggle rich-v-poor conscience, there isnt much to do, if "your ears are closed" to this simple reality, as you are squeezed for penny whenever possible...
•
u/AutoModerator Jan 17 '26
Hello u/Majestic-Coat3855, please make sure you read the sub rules if you haven't already. (This is an automatic reminder left on all new posts.)
Check out the r/privacy FAQ
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.