this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2025
418 points (98.6% liked)

Technology

76918 readers
3338 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 36 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Dyskolos@lemmy.zip 53 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

I would bet my right nut on the real reason for all this is some AI-billionaire who aggressively pushes this with moneyz. Having every fart we make soon be analyzed by AI is the best "natural" training there could be.

As a cherry on top is the total surveillance for the state(s). AI will probably do a decent job (despite what the article says) in scanning for potential "threats" to let actual people check.

But I can't even comprehend the power that would be needed to actually scan every shit by every person every minute. No data center in the world has this oomph. So it has to be a simple keyword-search (in all possible languages, even leetspeek and co?) To forward to ai. And if ai would just report 0.5% as "suspicious" for manual human control, it would be more supermassive than a black hole. This is just not doable and hence defeats it's fake reason: protecting the kids.

So that kinda just leaves ai-training and selective easy surveillances without court-orders. Which also won't protect kids. As every criminal out there will find a loophole.

[–] Tryenjer@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Of course, just listen to the CEO of Palantir, he already admitted that that's his goal. By inference, we can extrapolate that this is the goal of all major business leaders of these companies who are developing AI systems. They need more data to compete with China, and if that requires the West to have authoritarian mass surveillance systems, so be it.

https://gizmodo.com/palantir-ceo-says-a-surveillance-state-is-preferable-to-china-winning-the-ai-race-2000683144

[–] Dyskolos@lemmy.zip 2 points 6 days ago

While he's technically not wrong, i hate the world and where it will continue to go to.

[–] ChaoticEntropy@feddit.uk 11 points 1 week ago

All the current powers that be, private and governmental, can heartily agree that allowing the public to have any expectation of privacy or autonomy is highly undesirable.

[–] REDACTED 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Can we please stop circlejerking AI into everything? The chat control has been in debate before AI was mainstream

[–] Dyskolos@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I had multiple possible reasons. Total surveillance is enough already, the recent aggressive pushing hints towards another added goal.

You're free to offer YOUR insight. I don't even hate AI. I like it.

[–] REDACTED -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

My insight: EU is not interested in training AI for your corporations, neither are personal chats with likely zero accuracy/factuality good training material, neither is sms-style grammar going to improve any existing AI, everything about this is illogical and pretty stupid. It has always been about control, not.. training AI lol

[–] Dyskolos@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Illogical? Chat is not just about sms-style dumb texts. It's images and videos. Trillions of freshly taken photographs. Those are tremendously valuable. And even if it'd be just text, it's natural training on people. But it's also video calls, another incredibly valuable thing.

And sure, the EU has no AI to offer, hence I said "some ai billionaire" or anyone or lobby that wants that shit being pushed hard.

But as it is just a thought of a possibility I might totally be wrong. As if peasants like us would ever be allowed to know.

[–] REDACTED 1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Again, that is not a good training material. There have been numerous studies on the type of training data we feed and the result of it. This type of content tends to poison the data and lead to equalivent of brainrot for AI's. This is not very useful data for AI, there are far better sources. Again, seems highly illogical the EU would do all this just to train some shitty AI. Training material should also always be accompanied by context data, which is commonly missing from instant messaging. It's just too big of a mess.

[–] Dyskolos@lemmy.zip 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Fair points. But "just" surveillance? Anyone worth being surveiled sure wouldn't be so dumb to use WhatsApp or other stupid crap. I'm worthless to surveillance and even I would not be possible to surveil.

Just seems weird that it's pushed so hard. Surveillance was always a must-have, but why now? The moment it gets voted away it's back on the table.

[–] REDACTED 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Counter-argument: all my drug dealers use whatsapp. Real life is not movies, criminals are rarely tech savvy.

[–] Dyskolos@lemmy.zip 1 points 6 days ago

Depends on the level of criminal though. Pedo-networks surely know to evade the law. See e.g. the major pedo-forum which exists for way Over a decade and is full to the brim.

I also doubt that anyone really cares about some street-level-thug. Anyone seriously slinging would surely also just ditch surface apps. If they'd even use those phones at all. I wouldn't.

[–] melroy@kbin.melroy.org 39 points 1 week ago (3 children)

I will move to Linux phone if chat control is enforced. Chat control violates all existing privacy regulations. It's insane.

[–] Jason2357@lemmy.ca 4 points 6 days ago

I think the strategy used the world-over, is to surveil everyone and build network graphs. You may work extremely hard to secure your device and communications, but the algorithms will build up a dossier on you based on all of the people you associate with who are less capable or motivated. Machine learning is insanely good at filling in missing data in an information rich dataset.

[–] it_depends_man@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago (2 children)

That won't work in the sense on page 35, Article 2 definition (f) it says that this applies to

    (ii)an interpersonal communications service;
    (iv) an internet access service;

as well, meaning your phone provider and ISP. It's highly the approach to enforce this would couple e-SIM and some app on your phone or computer that things have to be routed through. Or you just don't get cell/internet service.

[–] eleitl@lemmy.zip 25 points 1 week ago (1 children)

This has not yet happened even in the most authoritarian jurisdictions, with the possible exception of North Korea. The Internet is built with open protocols so any restrictions will have to be implemented on the network edge. There is no vendor locking for on-prem routers in multiple countries. As long as all purpose computers are not illegal you can still use strong encryption and anonymizing services on your end devices on your own network. So any mandatory surveillance and tracking will have no power there.

[–] it_depends_man@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

I would be happy to be wrong.

The entire "proposal" is absolutely crazy from start to finish anyway. It's just that these companies will have to do ______ or be labeled or held liable for aiding in the distribution of CP.

Who knows what they will come up with.

Such a tech restriction would instantly kill hotspot capability of a phone. Not that I think they corrupt traitors in the EU wouldn't want to try it anyways.

[–] Scrollone@feddit.it 14 points 1 week ago (4 children)

You're lucky if you don't depend on apps such as banking apps or Ryanair digital boarding passes

[–] docus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

We’re going to need a sanctioned phone just for banking and another one for everything else. Plus maybe a third one to take to demonstrations etc. Just great :(

[–] eleitl@lemmy.zip 5 points 1 week ago

Do not take a mobile device on demonstrations if you can't verify it respects airplane mode. E.g. GOS does, but I'm not aware of any other such.

[–] melroy@kbin.melroy.org 8 points 1 week ago

That is a problem for future Melroy. Hopefully some apps can just be used in a web app, so just going to their website.

I also read about android virtualization within a container. Basically allowing you to still run android apps but we will see..

[–] eleitl@lemmy.zip 5 points 1 week ago

I use hardware TAN generators but my bank's app works on LineageOS and GrapheneOS. If my travel service doesn't accept printed out documents then it is not a travel service I will use.

[–] ftbd@feddit.org 2 points 1 week ago

That's one of the major restrictions for casual use, yes. But if these measures are actually implemented, it might be worth it to have a second phone (or some other device) just for online banking

[–] khepri@lemmy.world 28 points 1 week ago (1 children)

And coming soon, Chat Control 3: It Was Never About The Children

[–] SabinStargem@lemmy.today 6 points 1 week ago

Oh, it is. Whoever masters Chat Control, gets to decide whom they can blackmail and rendezvous. Especially the underaged.

Police and triple-letter agencies abuse information all the time to stalk their lovers or to get ahead in life. I bet this will be more of the same.

[–] MigratingApe@lemmy.dbzer0.com 27 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Hey, anyone care to explain what the fuck is wrong with Denmark?

[–] Tattorack@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

I wish I could tell you, but for all the cool and sensible things we have her, Denmark comes with... this.

What the fuck is this, Denmark?

[–] TheObviousSolution@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

It's sort of funny they have the reputation as one of the least corrupt countries in the world. It's funny because when you say that something is incapable of being vulnerable in some way, that means at the very least that they are fertile grounds waiting to invite it.

The public does not consider corruption a major problem in Danish society means those that are corrupt can get away with more because of less supervision. The OCDE has serious concerns about the lack of enforcement of bribery paid by Danish companies abroad and the Danske Bank money laundering scandal, which was the largest money laundering scandal ever in Europe and possibly the largest in world (at least until the Trump era), involved - you guessed it - Russian (among other USSR remnants) money laundering. Denmark will do what is good for Denmark, but Denmark is not the EU.

[–] vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 1 week ago

Dunno, my perception of Nordic countries has always been that they have (of course, they're human) corruption, they have organized crime and they have all kinds of social rot, but they also have no reservations in admitting having those or barriers at discussing and trying to help those, which was the reason for nicer things in their societies. Though inside that perception Denmark has always been the worst.

Still, it's all dynamics, and of course thinking you're set causes failures.

Russian money laundering is honestly not as big a problem as the degree of penetration of Russian state secret agents, which both inside Russia and outside is beyond what you'd reasonably expect. If you think a 13 years old girl can't be an agent, you're wrong. If you think such agents can't be a common enough thing, you're wrong. If you think it's limited to Russian/ex-USSR nationals and their relatives, you're wrong.

And that's the state of affairs during late USSR, these services haven't become less professional, the world since then was changing fast enough to sharpen them, but also in ways where they always had the resources to survive hardship and learn.

I don't know what the supreme goals of what one can call Russia's deep state are, and whether I would consider them something good or bad, but I'm sure western reactions to their actions are all 10-20 years late.

[–] Lumisal@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

They've always been the weird ones

[–] mrbutterscotch@feddit.org 27 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The Meeting was today at 10am. Has there been any news about it yet?

[–] theTarrasque@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago

I too am very interested

[–] goldenquetzal@lemmy.world 22 points 1 week ago

For fuck saks. This is so deceitful

[–] ivanafterall@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago

I give it about a month before they're scanning your teens and banning your texts.

Like trying to control une herde de la chats