Why the need to compare to China though? People can understand that mass surveillance is bad without resorting to "China bad". Go ask Snowdon if China is the mother of all surveillance.
Idk why communists defend China’s every move. Communism can be defended without excusing China’s authoritarian practices. I have Chinese friends living in China who tell me all kinds of horrific stories that they’ve had to deal with because of China’s mass surveillance (and more). That isn’t western propaganda, that’s people’s lived experiences. There is literally a “Great Firewall of China” lmao. China IS bad when it comes to their mass surveillance and suppression of speech. USA IS bad when it comes to their letting giant corporations have such free rein that it makes us all into serfs. Why compare to China? Because China is a great comparison.
How am I defending china? I just don't see the need to go "oh look like X country" whenever the EU or the US do something bad. We're plenty bad ourselves
Let's say both then. Both the US and China are surveillance states, and that makes them both bad.
Btw just so you are aware, there is some underlying animosity toward people who defend China here. Usually people who defend China are just trying to deflect and try to say things like "BUT America does bad things!" While trying to make it seem like that somehow absolves China of genocide and mass surveillance.
The hard part for those people to grasp is that Americans are usually happy to say yes, America sucks. Any country that engages in those actions sucks. Diehard tankies on the other hand are incapable of seeing flaws in China/Russia/whatever country they feel the need to defend.
Let’s say both then. Both the US and China are surveillance states, and that makes them both bad.
/signed
But also: all five-eyes states, and then a couple more. With western European countries trying hard to compete in the "who can fuck their citizens the mostest the bestest"
It's a language many people understand. I mean, you have to be extremely ignorant if you think China has good privacy laws implemented. Everyone knows what a nightmare that country is in that regard, ergo no one wants to be like them.
As someone who doesn't know much about China aside from the high competitiveness of their academic environment, I'm curious as to what sort of issues your friends face due to surveillance? Does it affect their day to day lives? Or does it just foster an atmosphere of "be careful what you say"?
"Bruh why would you compare them to the largest surveillance state in the world bro. Saying how the EU would be more like the the most widely-known example of government surveillance and blocking of Internet traffic is just saying China bad, bro.
It's highly likely that these laws will be passed because more people are voting for right wing leaders in EU, Right wing heavily supports this. If EU sets the example soon the whole world will follow.
they call themselves "right wing", but they arent. See here in orbanistan (hungary) orban and all his comrades were commie state party functionals, or were at least the part in the commie youth organization. Also they vote down 23 times (as of now) the disclosure of the commie state party agent files, serving commie dictatorships like PRC, and the soviet union mourner putin, etc. Just like AFD in germany, etc...
Definitely not my representatives in the EU..and all in front our wonderful Ursula von der Leyen, a personified political failure. And why this constant fake argument of child abuse?.. the real argument is that politicians and governments want to spy on EU inhabitants..time to vote differently..if this still helps anything in the EU ..
What a bullshit law. If things have flaws, they don't just have flaws for the benefit of police or government agencies. They have flaws for anyone that knows them or discovers them. This stuff will still be accessible for smart criminals, even more so in corrupt governments.
An encryption with exploits is not an encryption, it's a time bomb and it will blow up in your face at the worst moment.
They want that. It's no coincidence that people pushing this are all unelected.
It is a criminal takeover of the EU in its final stages (Europeans like to think they are very smart and have lots of strategic depth, but I'll repeat that these are the final stages of it).
Yeah, that's the point. What do guns have to do with encryption? I could say "If you outlaw beards, only outlaws will have beards" and it will make as much sense as your original post. I appreciate that you have a weird fetish for violence but you don't have to shoe-horn it into every conversation.
Privacy and guns can be used for defense. Beards generally don't affect that (though Alexander was of a different opinion and made his soldiers shave so that they couldn't be grabbed by the beard ; I think same was the reasoning for Roman soldiers shaving their beards and other hair).
You can’t murder a room full of children with pgp.
I'll just say it again in the hope that it might dawn on you that the two things are not even remotely similar enough that you can say "this also works for guns".
What? That they can both be used for defense? Name something that couldn't ever be used for defense. Your comparison is pointless because the only trait they share is one which is also shared by pretty much everything else on the planet. Like beards, to bring up an earlier example.
You can be anti-guns but he is still right. Criminals do have weapons where I live, even though it's illegal. Fortunately, we don't have many criminals since the country is rich
Unironically yes. Out of 1000 crime news I hear about here, maybe one of them is about gun violence. Also I have never ever heard about mass killings here like USA seems to have every week.
Lol is it really that hard for you to believe? I am not just talking about media channels, also just word around the block, multiple YouTube channels and such.
That's what I think. That's what I observed (anecdotally) and what statistics show. When the sentence for having a gun is higher than robbery or drug dealing or whatever, even criminals avoid that shit.
Why would you think criminals DO have guns in other countries?
I've always been reluctant to rely on papers like any constitution as a base for my perceived rights.
Maybe as an argument, in the sense of "smart people have said that it should be and made some points in its favor".
But in general it's a horrid mistake to rely on a paper. Some people you haven't given any consent will stamp a few saying that you are a slave and oops.
The reality is that there's no way to consistently defend a right suppressed by legal arguments. If you can check the chain of laws giving you some right or taking it, you'll always come to the point where it's just "we all decide that's law" and you were not part of that decision. And if you go the opposite way and just accept what's made law, then you are dropping the idea of rights in its entirety, making decisions made by someone else a law for you.
My point is that this is unsolvable and one can't replace good and evil with legal arguments. Laws will never be sufficiently good for that, even constitutional laws.
So I'm for right to arm oneself, but I don't think there's any magic allowing to universally prove that a thing is legally right or wrong.
Which is why, again, a journalism which isn't outrageous is just public relations, a protest that doesn't harm economy and break laws is just a demonstration, an a principle which can be overridden by a law or a threat of force is just virtue signalling.
If u make privacy illegal then only cops criminals, spooks criminals, governments criminals, billionaires criminals and other criminals will have privacy. FTFY.
And on Tuesday, 37 Members of Parliament signed an open letter to the Council of Europe urging legislators to reject Chat Control.
"We explicitly warn that the obligation to systematically scan encrypted communication, whether called 'upload-moderation' or 'client-side scanning,' would not only break secure end-to-end encryption, but will to a high probability also not withstand the case law of the European Court of Justice," the MEPs said. "Rather, such an attack would be in complete contrast to the European commitment to secure communication and digital privacy, as well as human rights in the digital space."
It's nothing to do with stopping pedos. The people pushing this year-in and year-out don't care THAT much about pedos. It's not a cause that's motivating enough for them to be putting in so much effort, trying to sneak in legislation after being repeatedly rebuffed.
Its insane to me how it was entirely proven that this whole political movement is a giant fear mongering psyop and despite that its still being discussed at all.
It's rather "tell me who's your friend and I'll tell you who you are", most of specific people involved in pushing this have a history with authoritarian regimes, some genocidal.
Many things may change overnight.
It’s not a cause that’s motivating enough for them to be putting in so much effort, trying to sneak in legislation after being repeatedly rebuffed.
Until those trying are in jail explaining their motivations in detail, this won't stop.
It's really all about having a way to get past encryption so they can spy on everyone indiscriminately. It's pushed that it's to save kids and unmask pedos, but the people in charge know the pedophiles are their rich donors.
It's about controlling opposition and making sure the wealthy can stay on top. Imagine if no small business can hide their information from their competitors.
