Yeah, nonsense, bullshit, whatever you want to call it. Actual pedos will trivially bypass Chat Control by switching to a messaging service that doesn't enforce it, or even by sending encrypted ZIP files via any ordinary messaging service.

> silk road was only busted because the guy had his http proxy responding on the VPS's IP and not just the tor eth

Does this justify every browser reporting every URL you visit to the government, and implementing a government-controlled blocklist of URLs on the off chance that a criminal might use Chrome for their criminal activity?

▲

flumpcakes 3 days ago | parent [-]

> Yeah, nonsense, bullshit, whatever you want to call it. Actual pedos will trivially bypass Chat Control by switching to a messaging service that doesn't enforce it, or even by sending encrypted ZIP files via any ordinary messaging service.

Yep, and then the politicians will create laws that outlaw encrypting zip files without a backdoor etc. That's my point, there's no nefarious plot here, it's just dumb laws to solve real problems.

I don't want these laws but they're going to be pushed while everyone is just pushing back on conspiracy grounds. That's not going to win over the average person.

▲

dns_snek 3 days ago | parent [-]

> That's my point, there's no nefarious plot here, it's just dumb laws to solve real problems.

You don't know the plot any more than we do. Whether the current government is nefarious or not is quite irrelevant.

Chat Control is a surveillance and censorship tool that we're being pinkie-promised will only be used "for good". In reality it is a tool which can be repurposed for domestic oppression, political persecution, and crowd control overnight at the government's sole discretion.

> everyone is just pushing back on conspiracy grounds.

That's not a conspiracy, that's just a factual statement about the indiscriminate capabilities of this technology. Governments across the world have a near-100% track record of abusing their power. It's not a matter of "if", it's only a matter of "when".

Otherwise what should we do next? Abolish freedom of speech? You wouldn't be silly enough to believe that the government would imprison you for your political speech, would you? That's conspiratorial thinking.

> That's not going to win over the average person.

Why should we care? If the fact of the matter has been explained to them and they're still gullible enough to give up their most essential civil liberties in exchange for nothing, they're a lost cause and a waste of time.

I don't count on the average village idiot to save the day here, I expect the EU courts to strike the law because it clearly violates the charter of fundamental human rights.

▲

flumpcakes 3 days ago | parent [-]

Sovereign governments already hold the ultimate power in society. By your reasoning any and all laws are an attack on your liberty.

	▲	dns_snek 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		If you're going to engage in bad faith then I'm not interested. My "reasoning" is firmly rooted in the founding principles of liberal democracies and our legally recognized fundamental rights. Our previous run-ins with fascism is why they exist, and anyone working to delegitimize them needs to be treated with utmost suspicion.