7 ms·
"The procedure now chosen gives the proponents of Chat Control a significant tactical advantage. Since the law is in its second reading, an absolute majority of
by belowavgiq 2mo ago
"The procedure now chosen gives the proponents of Chat Control a significant tactical advantage. Since the law is in its second reading, an absolute majority of 361 votes of all parliament members is required for amendments or a renewed rejection on Thursday. In contrast, a simple majority of the MEPs present is sufficient for the other side. As many parliamentarians have historically already departed by the last day before the summer break, the re-enactment of the regulation is considered almost unavoidable."
So, if I'm reading this correctly, Chat Control is bound to become law? and this is after I think 2/3 rejections, how democratic of the EU.
Oh, and parliamentarians starting their summer break whenever they want will never not be funny.
- skeptic_ai 2mo ago[flagged]
- khurs 2mo agoOne of reasons the the EU exists is so domestic prime ministers can deflect blame and say "not me, it was them over there in the EU parliament and my hands are tied"
- wongarsu 2mo agoThat's the British approach In Germany it's usually the other way around: the EU tries to force us to do objectively good things, while national and regional governments drag their feet implementing EU law or complying with regulations. We regularly have headlines about how we might have to pay fines to the EU, and every time it's for something where the EU seems clearly on the morally right side And all that despite our government's best efforts to send their worst politicians to represent us in the EU. Describing von der Leyen as a disgraced politician who just failed upwards would not be entirely inaccurate
- khurs 2mo ago"In Germany it's usually the other way around:" Germany is one of most wealthy, powerful and biggest contributors to the EU budget. They can't be bullied round easily. "We regularly have headlines about how we might have to pay fines to the EU" The state controls the media... a lot of headlines are orchestrated. But it is done so well, unless you know, you don't know... Where Germany doesn't agree, it has sway. Where Germany and France don't agree, it is unlikely, and where Germany, France and Italy don't agree it's not going to happen as some countries matter more than others.
- wongarsu 2mo agoSure, but all of those used to be true of the UK too back when they were in the EU, and yet they had the good cop/bad cop roles swapped compared to Germany
- miroljub 2mo ago[flagged]
- chrystalkey 2mo agoYou have apparently no idea what an actual dictatorship is
- psychoslave 2mo ago[flagged]
- skeptic_ai 2mo agoTell me the difference please. Which country we compare to?
- skeptic_ai 2mo agoI lived in a dictatorship, I can’t tell the difference. Is exactly the same for the average Joe.
- nuka_coffee 2mo agoA dictatorship has a dictator. Who doesn't know that?
- aaomidi 2mo agoTBH modern dictatorships are a lot less obvious in the way you describing. There are dictatorships, where a very select few people have absolute power, but there’s no visible dictator. Iran is a country like this. There’s no visible dictator. It’s a game of power between the clergy, the military, and the civil government.
- wongarsu 2mo agoThose are more like aristocracies or oligarchies than dictatorships though. Though maybe those are not the best descriptions of Iran either
- raverbashing 2mo ago1 - this is about Chat Control 1.0 2 - The vote was on the "Urgency requirement" > parliamentarians starting their summer break whenever they want will never not be funny Eh. This is the least problematic thing here. Some MEPs might just be on official PTO.
- procaryote 2mo agoThe voting dynamics changing beacause elected representatives can't plan their vacations like any regular work place is pretty silly
- raverbashing 2mo agoYes it's a dirty trick
- isodev 2mo ago> how democratic of the EU Well, these are the MEPs elected by member states. We don’t like the outcome but this means chat control is well supported within the government of each country.
- CrisMystik 2mo agoMEPs are directly elected by citizens, not governments. It's the Council instead where representatives (ministers) of all national governments sit
- isodev 2mo agoYup, edited to clarify I mean the MEPs bring “the will of the people”. Clearly not enough has happened on local level to raise awareness / lobby against chat control. I don’t think many outside tech are even aware if the slippery slope of the surveillance machinery.
- A1kmm 2mo agoThe European Council (heads of states) sets the agenda, the European Commission (delegates from each state) writes the laws, and the MEPs (elected by the public) decide whether or not to accept the laws. The Council decided Chat Control was on the agenda, the Commission wrote the law, and the MEPs voted to reject said law in March. Then the president of the parliament (not the MEPs at large) asked the Council to ignore the March vote and proceed with the agenda under urgency as if it had passed. Now a minority of the MEPs (331 out of 720) - but a majority of who were present at the time and chose not to abstain - have voted to deal with the matter under urgency, but haven't voted on the substance of it. This makes the actual vote happen on the last sitting day, when apparently they are hoping a lot of MEPs will be away.
- CrisMystik 2mo agoThe first sentence is correct, but > The Council decided Chat Control was on the agenda The Council is different from the European Council (yes, the treaty drafters were not much creative in naming institutions), the latter is composed of the heads of states and sets the agenda like you said, while the former is composed on ministers in the policy area under discussion, and it's a "co-legislator" together for the Parliament (on most areas, including Chat Control 1.0 & 2.0, both must agree to pass an act). The issue here (it's part of the "democratic deficits") is that, in its second reading, the EP needs an absolute majority to amend/reject the Council first reading, and a simple majority to approve it and pass it into law.
- Balinares 2mo ago> So, if I'm reading this correctly, Chat Control [2.0, implied] is bound to become law? Nope. This is bad, but not THAT bad. This is an extension of the existing Chat Control 1.0, which was set to expire (or maybe already has, I didn't keep track). AIUI it gives chat companies permission to scan user chats for illicit content, but does not mandate it. This is bad, but it's not the much worse still Chat Control 2.0 that was defeated several times already.
- clear-octopus 2mo ago[dead]
- delusional 2mo ago> or maybe already has, I didn't keep track Literally second paragraph. > to reinstate the transitional regulation for Chat Control, which expired in April
- deleted 2mo ago[deleted]
- belowavgiq 2mo agoThanks for the correction! I guess I can live with that.
- MaxikCZ 2mo agoyes. Frog will be boiled tomorrow, no need to panic today.
- order-matters 2mo agoI think their point is that you lose some battles in a war, chat Control 1.0 is a battle that was already lost. While it is still worthwhile to make an effort to retake lost ground there, that can be done strategically and through habitual effort and does not demand immediate attention the same way an imminent threat of losing new ground would be
- deleted 2mo ago[deleted]
- ur-whale 2mo ago> how democratic of the EU. Really, it's not the first time the EU pulls that kind of shite off. And summertime is the perfect time, in Europe everyone's at the beach. They even managed to find a work around an actual referendum.
- dgellow 2mo agoIt’s the council. We have to be clear which institution we are talking about within the EU, otherwise that doesn’t make any sense. The European Parliament already pushed back that proposal. The EU is made of a lot of different actors with their own agenda. Here the council, with the help of the EPP party is doing that undemocratic maneuvering: They made it on purpose so that the parliament is unlikely to be able to push back a third time (all of that leaked a few days ago)
- vslira 2mo agoIf the EU as a system has an undemocratic backdoor it's descriptively correct to call it undemocratic. Not to play too hard on the HN user stereotype, but you wouldn't call a computer system that is mostly secure other than a known privilege escalation exploit secure, would you?
- bigyabai 2mo ago> you wouldn't call a computer system that is mostly secure other than a known privilege escalation exploit secure, would you? People do this all the time, regardless of whether or not they're right or wrong. "This product I own is definitely secure because the marketing says so, even if the CVEs prove me wrong" is a common sentiment online and in real life. Not to play too hard on the computing-detatched normie stereotype, but this type of surveillance is bound to succeed due to their apathy. We've seen this play out in the US before, and it's always a shoo-in for the surveillance legislation. Security, privacy and fairness doesn't even cross most people's minds anymore.
- dgellow 2mo agoEvery single democratic system relies on norms at some level. Democratic isn’t a boolean flag. When the French prime minister is using the 49-3 rule to bypass the parliament that’s undemocratic, that doesn’t make the system itself undemocratic. When a US president is using an executive order to pass a law that’s undemocratic, that doesn’t make the system itself undemocratic. Here the maneuver goes against the spirit of democracy and against the expected norms, however the EU itself is democratic
- inigyou 2mo agoWhat percentage of EU citizens support Chat Control and what percentage oppose it?
- Frannky 2mo agoWhy is this answer down voted? Isn't a reasonable question to ask? Are the lawmakers proposing laws the majority of the people want?
- t0bia_s 2mo agoWe never know, because it depends on what your source of information is instructed to propose. Like public opinion polls that created false illusion of what majority wants. But it's just a sample with manufactured questions manipulated to answer specific options. Personally, I don't fell lawmakers proposing laws that I want. Firstly, because I don't belive that laws are solutions for problems.
- lxxxvi 2mo ago> So, if I'm reading this correctly, Chat Control is bound to become law? and this is after I think 2/3 rejections, how democratic of the EU. Yes, (un?)fortunately that's how democracy works. You keep trying until you get the required majority. No different than elections. And now, instead of blaming "democracy" or the EU, how about we look at people we all elected to our national and EU institutions who are now making this happen. And just preemptively, there's is not a single person in a decision-making position on this issue whose power wasn't gifted to them either directly or indirectly by the voters. So let's not blame the EU for people being dumb with their votes.