> So, if I'm reading this correctly, Chat Control [2.0, implied] is bound to become law?

Nope. This is bad, but not THAT bad.

This is an extension of the existing Chat Control 1.0, which was set to expire (or maybe already has, I didn't keep track). AIUI it gives chat companies permission to scan user chats for illicit content, but does not mandate it.

This is bad, but it's not the much worse still Chat Control 2.0 that was defeated several times already.

▲

an hour ago | parent | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

belowavgiq an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Thanks for the correction! I guess I can live with that.

▲

MaxikCZ 27 minutes ago | parent [-]

yes. Frog will be boiled tomorrow, no need to panic today.

▲

order-matters 15 minutes ago | parent [-]

I think their point is that you lose some battles in a war, chat Control 1.0 is a battle that was already lost. While it is still worthwhile to make an effort to retake lost ground there, that can be done strategically and through habitual effort and does not demand immediate attention the same way an imminent threat of losing new ground would be

	▲	dgellow 10 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		> chat Control 1.0 is a battle that was already lost That’s not true, the previous instance of it expired, and the parliament rejected it. It wasn’t already lost, it was actually a win for people against the proposal

▲

delusional 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> or maybe already has, I didn't keep track

Literally second paragraph.

> to reinstate the transitional regulation for Chat Control, which expired in April