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.

      • melroy@kbin.melroy.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        4 hours ago

        is it though? After the EU parliament has rejected it TWICE in the past, it has been pushed as an urgent procedure for a new plenary vote. The EU has simply continued to put the vote on the agenda to get the outcome they’ve wanted since the start.

        • fox [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 minute ago

          The purpose of a system is what it does. If a measure repeatedly fails to pass and is then successfully made law regardless, then clearly the system must, in some way, be built to supercede voting authority.

        • ghost_laptop@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          3 hours ago

          yes, that’s exactly what they want, what did you think? you live in a free country or some shit? i really dont get westoids, they literally invented fascism and caused 90% of the wars in the last 4 centuries and somehow they’re the democratic people or something? smh

          • huf [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            3 hours ago

            “i know it’s smoking and smells foul like a 4 week old corpse but the bottle says YIM-YUM on it. how can it be bad?”

        • huf [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          3 hours ago

          yes. the EU is a western institution, its purpose was never to act in accordance with the will of the ordinary people. it was to serve the capitalists.

          • myrmidex@belgae.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 hour ago

            It was born out of the european community for coal and steel, how could it have turned out any different…

  • airikr@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    4 hours ago

    So you just have to nag and nag and nag until they say “sigh, alright then…”?! WTF?!

  • wanderer@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    3 hours ago

    So… what happens next? They start requiring backdoor in all chat apps (for those that do not already have one)? Is PGP now the only way? That would be extremely difficult since “normal” people just don’t seem to care at all.

    • quick_snail@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      51 minutes ago

      PGP is not the only way. And applications that use PFS are preferred.

      The article mentions that WhatsApp is exempt. See also Signal, Wire, SimpleX, etc

    • Korkki@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      fat chance, but we can pray. Despite this move being illegal as fuck.

  • illi@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    4 hours ago

    A symbolic exemption was adopted for encrypted communications—though in practice, service providers do not scan these anyway.

    Well I guess that’s something.

  • warm@kbin.earth
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    4 hours ago

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

    • illi@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      4 hours ago

      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
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        4 hours ago

        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
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          15 minutes ago

          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.

      • Korkki@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        4 hours ago

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