No, not really. It’s because they retracted the proposal before going to vote, because they knew it wouldnt pass after Germany publicly said they would vote against.
Then they changed some stuff and send it again, which is now rejected as it seems.
Yes, I think we’re all assuming the law came into parliament the regular way. I assumed the “they” are supposed lobbyists who are standing behind and outside the regular entity…
Am I missing something or are you pulling a Nielsen on me?
“Coffee?”
“Yes, I know.”
it’s indicative of the system we’re in. our oligarchs have enough money to pay people to push for this in perpetuity while the rest of us are forced to give up some degree of our lives to fight it off on a field of battles that’s tilted towards money; they will win eventually unless the system itself is changed.
Good, but pretty meaningless overall while they still allow lobbying to take place.
They pretend to care that lobbying means corruption from corporate interests, but doing anything meaningful to stop lobbying entirely and punish anyone still doing it would be “authoritarian communism” now, wouldn’t it?
TommySoda@lemmy.world
on 26 Mar 15:45
nextcollapse
They’ll just change a few things and try again. I feel like we’ve been hearing about chat control on and off for about 5 years now and I can’t imagine it’ll go away soon.
HuntressHimbo@lemmy.zip
on 26 Mar 15:49
nextcollapse
Saw this then scrolled more to see the EU going after porn sites for age verification. 😞
I think that Patrick posted it. basically the ones against where the conservatives, both left and right where against (even if there were some people inside those parities who voted to continue the scanning)
EDIT: apparently EPP voted against not because they want to support privacy but because the proposal was not enough invasive. they were afraid that it would have stopped their Chat control 2.0 proposal.
WaxRhetorical@lemmy.world
on 26 Mar 17:59
nextcollapse
For those of us out of the loop, who is Patrick?
dingleberrylover@lemmy.world
on 26 Mar 18:02
nextcollapse
Definitely not a Krusty Krab
baguettefish@discuss.tchncs.de
on 26 Mar 18:04
nextcollapse
i think they mean patrick breyer from the german pirate party
EPP and ECR voted against extension, but IIRC the reason is that they wanted stricter controls instead. Most other parties were largely in favour of extending the current chat control mandate.
True, was confused.
This was the result on the initial proposal, not the vote on extension of the exemption.
So as I understand it, we already have chat control since there is no legal framework (initial proposal didn’t pass) and this exemption allows them to spy on us.
Green = “opposing”, red = “supporting”… “chat control extension”. I guess the greens are against the chat control proposal, though that’s hardly clear, and there seem to be more reds than greens so that suggests the chat control proposal was accepted, or is there some other layer to this? Also the stance of a state bears no relation to that of its representatives. Very confusing
It’s not the topic of the vote I’m trying to clarify but rather trying to make sense of that web page showing who is voting for what, and how, if at all that is connected to the European Parliament vote. That website suggests overwhelming support for the proposal at both state and representative level, I’m not sure what to make of that.
Yeah it seems to be backwards, they voted for an “Extension of the temporary derogation”, which I assume means if do you want to take more time to discuss this problem vote yes, or vote no to enact the newly proposed law now. Which is why the greens are paradoxically for the proposal and the EPP is against. Another layer of shenanigans to confuse people I guess.
It could be, although it also seems that “opposing” representatives are usually of the left/green persuasion and the right wing is mostly “supporting”, which is not what I’d expect to see in that case. All I can say for sure is that it’s very confusing.
Well the proposal is to extend the temporary exemption that expires on April 4.
As it is now under this exemption THEY ARE ALREADY doing their dystopian scanning.
Since there is no legal framework to do this they and it’s against the current laws they use this exemption until they can force the final law that legalizes it.
Kazel@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 26 Mar 17:10
nextcollapse
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
on 27 Mar 11:55
nextcollapse
IIRC (but could be wrong) the EPP wanted stricter chat controls, not an extension of what was already there.
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.
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
freeman@sh.itjust.works
on 27 Mar 11:07
nextcollapse
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
on 31 Mar 12:56
nextcollapse
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
on 31 Mar 13:02
collapse
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;
threaded - newest
Will they just revote again then until it passes?
hopefully no. but we are still in danger
This is indeed the plan. Only 1 time is enough to get this through the system. But it requires 500 times saying no first.
When the European Union is low-key IRA
That would make us Margaret Thatcher, which is very gross
Well based on the seats in the parliament, most eu voters are rightwing to some degree. So it’s Tatcher going undercover IRA to bomb herself?
Why was chat control allowed to be presented again in the first place.
this is the real thing, this is almost certainly unconstitutional.
greedy corps going against law as usual.
No, not really. It’s because they retracted the proposal before going to vote, because they knew it wouldnt pass after Germany publicly said they would vote against.
Then they changed some stuff and send it again, which is now rejected as it seems.
Now they need to wait, but they didnt before.
Who are they?
The Commission probably since they’re the only entity who can propose law
How do I respond to this^^
Yes, I think we’re all assuming the law came into parliament the regular way. I assumed the “they” are supposed lobbyists who are standing behind and outside the regular entity…
Am I missing something or are you pulling a Nielsen on me? “Coffee?” “Yes, I know.”
Oh, sorry. Thought you actually didn’t knew, my bad!
So this war is far from an end huh?
They won’t stop pushing until they get it
April 3, already planned
We have to win every time. They only need to win once.
Can it just fuck off for good this time?
PLEASE
it’s indicative of the system we’re in. our oligarchs have enough money to pay people to push for this in perpetuity while the rest of us are forced to give up some degree of our lives to fight it off on a field of battles that’s tilted towards money; they will win eventually unless the system itself is changed.
Good, but pretty meaningless overall while they still allow lobbying to take place.
They pretend to care that lobbying means corruption from corporate interests, but doing anything meaningful to stop lobbying entirely and punish anyone still doing it would be “authoritarian communism” now, wouldn’t it?
They’ll just change a few things and try again. I feel like we’ve been hearing about chat control on and off for about 5 years now and I can’t imagine it’ll go away soon.
Saw this then scrolled more to see the EU going after porn sites for age verification. 😞
Let’s celebrate this victory… even though it’s concerning that it is a recurring topic :-/
About fucking time for some good news.
It is concerning news, because we narrowly dodged it this time by one vote.
Where can I see who voted for and against? I want to know if I need to change who I vote for next EU election.
I think that Patrick posted it. basically the ones against where the conservatives, both left and right where against (even if there were some people inside those parities who voted to continue the scanning)
EDIT: apparently EPP voted against not because they want to support privacy but because the proposal was not enough invasive. they were afraid that it would have stopped their Chat control 2.0 proposal.
For those of us out of the loop, who is Patrick?
Definitely not a Krusty Krab
i think they mean patrick breyer from the german pirate party
Probably Patrick Breyer, who often posts about privacy issues in the EU parliament.
www.patrick-breyer.de/en/
Thanks!
What?
I see conservatives+ extreme right pro. Also some fake left
Against greens -real left.
(Not absolute since they vote individually)
But by faction:
pro: EPP,ECR, ID/Patriots
Against: EFA, The Left, Renew Europe, S&D(divided)
Undecided: S&D, Renew Europe
howtheyvote.eu/votes/189574
EPP and ECR voted against extension, but IIRC the reason is that they wanted stricter controls instead. Most other parties were largely in favour of extending the current chat control mandate.
True, was confused.
This was the result on the initial proposal, not the vote on extension of the exemption.
So as I understand it, we already have chat control since there is no legal framework (initial proposal didn’t pass) and this exemption allows them to spy on us.
Scroll down and select your country: fightchatcontrol.eu
It’s always the ones you most expect.
Green = “opposing”, red = “supporting”… “chat control extension”. I guess the greens are against the chat control proposal, though that’s hardly clear, and there seem to be more reds than greens so that suggests the chat control proposal was accepted, or is there some other layer to this? Also the stance of a state bears no relation to that of its representatives. Very confusing
it’s explained right there above the vote summary
It’s not the topic of the vote I’m trying to clarify but rather trying to make sense of that web page showing who is voting for what, and how, if at all that is connected to the European Parliament vote. That website suggests overwhelming support for the proposal at both state and representative level, I’m not sure what to make of that.
Yeah it seems to be backwards, they voted for an “Extension of the temporary derogation”, which I assume means if do you want to take more time to discuss this problem vote yes, or vote no to enact the newly proposed law now. Which is why the greens are paradoxically for the proposal and the EPP is against. Another layer of shenanigans to confuse people I guess.
howtheyvote.eu/votes/189574
It could be, although it also seems that “opposing” representatives are usually of the left/green persuasion and the right wing is mostly “supporting”, which is not what I’d expect to see in that case. All I can say for sure is that it’s very confusing.
EDIT: thanks for that link 😁
352 against
248 pro
44 undecided
A simple majority will do
I’m talking about a web page linked to by MoffKalast, see comments above
Well the proposal is to extend the temporary exemption that expires on April 4.
As it is now under this exemption THEY ARE ALREADY doing their dystopian scanning.
Since there is no legal framework to do this they and it’s against the current laws they use this exemption until they can force the final law that legalizes it.
see u all on monday
Dude, we’re protesting now until all those fuckers who voted in favor of chat control are voted out of parliament. We have names!
they will keep trying in the most sneaky ways until they are deposed. they only need to succeed once.
We should go to war against corpocracy, until all corporations are bankrupt.
EVERY. DAMN. ONE.
.
Ew dawg get a grip
Why do we have to keep fighting our own government for our rights? Why can’t our government just represent us?
Governments don’t represent the common people anymore.
We should topple the EU then tbh
To put it in Douglas Adams words: Because the politicians are lizards ;)
Because unfortunately our rights are opposed to the will of capital and they serve capital first and foremost
Why can’t they vote on a ban to do any chat control bills? Stop this nonsense from happening again.
If you have money you can ask the lobbyists.
Congratulations!
BY ONE FUCKING VOTE!
howtheyvote.eu/votes/189574
Vote out every single fucker who is trying to limit our freedoms!
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.
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.
IIRC (but could be wrong) the EPP wanted stricter chat controls, not an extension of what was already there.
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.
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
Even worse I think there was one more vote for the extension but they need 50% +1 to pass and there were 24 abstentions.
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
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?
www.europarl.europa.eu/…/TA-10-2026-0070_EN.html
I imagine they’re thinking, “Well we will see what the new vote next month has to say about that!”
If politicans say something the opposite seems to happen so good bye private chats :(