Privacy

49692 readers

1107 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

Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn't great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
Don't promote proprietary software
Try to keep things on topic
If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
Be nice :)

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 6 years ago

MODERATORS

233

EU Parliament greenlights Chat Control 1.0 (www.patrick-breyer.de)

submitted 1 day ago by hatingfedizen@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/privacy@lemmy.ml

38 comments fedilink hide all child comments

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/71975475

Today, the European Parliament allowed the suspicionless mass scanning of private communications (“Chat Control 1.0”) to pass, 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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] warm@kbin.earth 10 points 23 hours ago (3 children)

Surely it needs more in favor to pass? Ugh I need to reducate myself on this system

[–] illi@sh.itjust.works 45 points 23 hours ago (4 children)

This truly is bonkers.

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.

More people is against it than in favor, but the number of people against it is not sufficient so it gets passed? How can that ever be possible?

[–] Zak@lemmy.world 32 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

They used a procedural trick which only had to pass by a majority of those present to create a situation where it would need an absolute majority to fail in the next vote.

This happened as many MEPs have already left for their summer break and were therefore absent and unable to vote. It appears that Parliament President Roberta Metsola engineered this, but I haven't looked in to it in detail.

[–] limonfiesta@lemmy.world 19 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

Every MEP who participated in the subversion of democracy in favor of totalitarianism and mass surveillance, is an enemy of the people and should be treated as such.

[–] fubbernuckin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 8 hours ago

And anyone involved in orchestrating this situation is an enemy of the state, as they have clearly exploited a flaw of the system to undermine the authority of lawmakers.

[–] Korkki@lemmy.ml 16 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago)

They arranged a vote that required absolute majority just before summer break. devious and calculated.

[–] melroy@kbin.melroy.org 2 points 23 hours ago

exactly my point..

[–] theherk@lemmy.world 1 points 20 hours ago

It would be bonkers, but it is flipped.

[–] hneerqe@lemmy.world 2 points 21 hours ago

it's gamed and rigged. there you go.

[–] theherk@lemmy.world 1 points 20 hours ago

It does. Click the link where it says that backward. The article just has it wrong.