A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Ask Historians !askhistorians@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
Note that the law passed automatically because at least 361 MEPs did not vote against it, regardless of how many voted for it.
Yes this is a real thing in the EU, you can just pass laws on a minority if they really want them.
Straight out of the US/fascist playbook.
The US voting system is fucked up and we've got a dictator, but even we don't make a bill into a law when the nays outnumber the yays. Quorum rules exist for a reason.
You need to clarify, the record show majority in favour.
The vote was framed as stopping the automated renewal of an existing law.
So in favour means "in favour of not having mass surveillance"
My guess (which I admittedly haven't checked) is that that's also why a simple majority wasn't enough (because they essentially would have been overturning law)
That's not like the US system at all
Technically. The vote was worded in a way that it was about removing the old law - stopping it from being renewed automatically - which requires a 2/3rds majority to happen.
This is just gutting to hear about. I'm so incredibly disappointed. I genuinely, and naively as it turns out, thought the EU "leadership" was better than this. :(
People voted in a bunch of right wing nutters, so there you are.
I checked my own country's MEP voting record and this shit was entirely done by the mainstream parties - even the far-right (to my surprise) tried to stop it.
If you think about it, it makes sense that those entrenched in power are the ones more interested in mass surveilance and other forms or early detection of dissent, and in most of Europe the far-right are not in power, they're the challengers and it's the mainstream parties (generally two of them, thanks to anti-Democratic non-PV voting systems) which alternate in power.
welcome
What changes with the return of Chat Control 1.0—and what stays the same:
- What is coming back: US tech companies are once again allowed to scan private messages without a warrant or prior suspicion. This affects direct messages on platforms like Instagram, Discord, Snapchat, Skype, and Xbox, as well as emails via Google’s Gmail and Apple’s iCloud.
- What remains unchanged: Public social media posts and files hosted in cloud storage could already be scanned without this law. Furthermore, private messages can always be reported by users, or monitored by authorities using targeted, court-ordered wiretapping.
- What is still NOT being scanned: End-to-end encrypted chats, such as those on WhatsApp, have always been exempt from these scans. Additionally, European providers of messaging and email services have never implemented chat control measures.
Huh? What is this for when e2ee is being exempt? Is it actually privacy measure in style "You will be tracked unless you use encryption"?
It's a stepping stone towards more surveillance, just like every other bill that lead us here. Small enough that the populus won't riot, large enough that's it's a tangible blow to privacy and democracy.
Howtheyvote show the reverse in the voting record. 314 in favour
Yeah, this article seems to have the numbers flipped.
For: 314(52 %). Against: 276(45 %). Abstentions: 17(3 %). In total, 607 MEPs voted. 112 MEPs didn’t vote.
Oh for fucks sake!
So, what are some good encrypted alternatives to common messaging apps? Signal instead of WhatsApp/Messenger etc? Proton mail/drive/etc instead of Google? Any other suggestions? Would a mobile vpn help?
Just go offline, I am so sick of everything being an opportunity for privacy invasions and money extraction.
There's a number of both work and private reasons why that won't be feasible. Also, I feel that we should not surrender the whole of Internet because of this bullshit.
I agree like but every direction is getting fucked at the moment.
Signal instead of WhatsApp is generally a good idea, but WA is not covered by this law as they are end to end encrypting all messages. Switching to Proton Mail would help, using a VPN (most likely) would not.
I can't understand why anybody would trust WhatsApp. It's development and infrastructure are paid for by one of the last companies you want to trust with your private data, and they even run expensive ad spots for it. Why would they do that? Facebook is not altruistic.
Are you sure it’s all messages? I thought WA group chats are not encrypted.
I mean, we don't know for sure since WA is closed source. But group chats are supposed to be encrypted. You're thinking of Telegram.
I don’t use either of them but yeh, I probably mixed them up. Thanks!
Threema...
Perhaps Briar? I keep wanting to try it, but don't have contacts that also do. It runs offline through Bluetooth and WiFi direct as well as online through TOR.
Why are the votes flipped in the article?
You read correctly the majority went to the nays
Jfc