I’m trying to learn more about EU politics, and when something like this won’t die after being beat down several times, in the US it’s almost always some industry lobbying organization.

And a problem we have globally, is that there isn’t an organized counter movement in the opposite direction (that privacy is a human right, that this isn’t a path to security, that states need to be restrained and restricted in their tendencies towards authoritarianism).

Without that countermovement, it’s almost inevitable something like this will pass as the lobbying organization can long outlive the current generation of activists or politicians who see the problems with something like chat control.

Thank you.

But what groups are advocating for this? There is clearly a significant campaign behind this. It doesn’t seem at all grassroots.

It feels like this is just going to keep coming back, and that it’s being pushed by a centrally organized project. If privacy protections aren’t effectively enshrined in law, inevitably this kind of nanny state surveillance will happen.

Went on the wrong walk

And also I hate horses.

Who is promoting this and why is it constantly coming back?

peaks out from behind tree

I’m 1000% convinced this guy has been smoking his own custom llm.

The Lathe of Heaven.

Someones having some really bad dreams and fucking with the timeline.

Like, a forum, at least in the default view, is like a waterfall of conversation. This is because every topic is single threaded.

When you have subconversations and quotes that form, the entire conversation history gets bumped along with the reply. It ends up being like… an avalanche of text.

Threading, like we have here, means I don’t get barraged by a wall of text if we have a long conversation. Its nested and makes coherent sense, and doesn’t overwhelm.

Its a major improvement.

one handed or dual wielding?

Yeah. The way forums threaded made things impossible to follow.

My misspelling it doesn’t change its meaning, which is obvious in its context.

Again, pedantry.

When using aphorisms, please try and Google them.

Cajones has been a slang term for “balls” or “bravery” or “having the guts” for over a hundred years. So not only are you being a pedantic prick, you are also a wrong pedantic prick. If you are going to be a pedantic prick, you should be the one to google if you are even right first. I grew up in a Spanish/ English speaking community, this is the word we used (although we used huevos too, but that literally meant like, your balls; less “having the balls”, or having courage to stand up to someone). It should occur to you that you don’t have a monopoly over the use of language, so maybe check that.

Fuck the ducks.

Ahh the astroturf installation crew has arrived.

This is a distraction.

We should be concerned with Tucker Carlson and Candice Owens.