Technology
This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.
Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.
Rules:
1: All Lemmy rules apply
2: Do not post low effort posts
3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff
4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.
5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)
6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist
7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed
view the rest of the comments
He doesn't have to go to the press with authoritarian statements defending chat control. This is what he said:
"We must break with the totally erroneous perception that it is everyone's civil liberty to communicate on encrypted messaging services."
This is Putin-style authoritarianism coming from Peter Hummelgaard.
How in the name of fuck anyone thinks they can prevent encryption is beyond me. That ship sailed 30 years ago. People who want it will find a way.
The problem is that they don't have to prevent encryption at all...
Many governments are already recording and storing incredible amounts of your Internet traffic.
With this new legislation they want to require all companies, that offer some form of encrypted communication, to submit all the messages for scanning before they are encrypted. So they want to force Facebook and many others to actually intercept the messages before they get "end-to-end" encrypted, so they can get scanned by AI and other systems to look for CSAM.
Of course they can't prevent encryption... Anyone can get some encryption software that doesn't submit the messages to scanning before encrypting...
Now you as a person have the options of either using a platform that scans your messages, or finding something that actually offers privacy.
If the government then decides that they want to investigate you, then they just dig into their trove of intercepted messages. If you only used scanned services, then they can see all your messages and probably find something in them to prosecute you over. But if you used any encrypted services they don't have access to, then they can just start prosecuting you for using encryption that they can't spy on...
In either case you lose, and they gain the ability to practically put anyone they want behind bars.
And who knows who will wield these tools at a later point, and what they might decide should be illegal, which they can then immediately dig for in all their previously stored and scanned messages.
Yeah the criminals will quickly find ways to avoid using services that scan client side is my main issue.
I'm technical enough that I can too if the time ever comes. I'm in the "nothing criminal to hide, but fuck you you're not seeing my texts anyway" camp.
History is so, so full of examples of this being abused by what were originally well intentioned motives (Jews in The Netherlands rounded up because of census information etc.). I just do not trust any future government and neither should anyone else.
Yeah what's next, microphones that listen to everything we say?
East Berlin and the STASI remembers.