this post was submitted on 26 Mar 2026
1041 points (99.5% liked)

Privacy

47877 readers
241 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] lb_o@lemmy.world 67 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

BY ONE FUCKING VOTE!

https://howtheyvote.eu/votes/189574

Vote out every single fucker who is trying to limit our freedoms!

[–] 1984@lemmy.today 20 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Thats actually insane in itself that it got that close. Next time they will succeed. :/

People are so stupid to support this. They dont seem to understand that its never about protecting anyone and its always about building dystopia.

[–] freeman@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 weeks ago

Even worse I think there was one more vote for the extension but they need 50% +1 to pass and there were 24 abstentions.

[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago

as regards the extension of its period of application

does it mean that this vote was only about the extension of the regulation that allowed voluntary participation in scanning for chat providers?

honestly, that's the lesser of the worries, we know facebook and fo are scanning all messages going through them no matter what

[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

also, I was surprised that in my conservative country no MEP voted with acceptance. but maybe it's because the proposal included adding clauses like this?

(v) not applied to interpersonal communications to which end-to-end encryption is, has been or will be applied;

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-10-2026-0070_EN.html

[–] Tenderizer@aussie.zone 1 points 1 week ago

That sounds kinda reasonable then. If the company has access to the chat logs in plain text, they should probably be scanning it for CSAM. Though the use of AI to identify it is concerning, given the low accuracy. And I guess there's also the risk of communications with someone's doctor being flagged.

On reflection it's still a dumb law.

[–] chigga@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

i don't understand, was EPP for or against the extension ? Cause my understanding was that they asked to have a second vote even if the first one already rejected the extension.

[–] ChairmanMeow@programming.dev 2 points 2 weeks ago

IIRC (but could be wrong) the EPP wanted stricter chat controls, not an extension of what was already there.

[–] orosus@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I don't understand the votes on that website, most people from EPP voted 👎 (against the extension) but that means they are against chat control? Or in favor? What european parties are opposing to the chat control, I want to know which parties we can trust on this matter.

[–] chigga@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

as another comment said, EPP was against this proposal due to it being not strict enough. They want full control of your chat (e2ee ones too). they were afraid that this would set a precedent for limits for chat control and voted againts