zlacker

[parent] [thread] 49 comments
1. andai+(OP)[view] [source] 2025-09-30 19:38:30
WhatsApp, Telegram and everyone else should pull out of EU in protest of Chat Control. Then EU will be forced to make its own chat app, UX will be terrible, and citizens will finally feel enough pain to contact their representatives ;)
replies(16): >>IlikeK+j1 >>lawles+b3 >>psycho+U9 >>downri+Ha >>ben_w+1b >>blibbl+nd >>drnick+Dd >>pagane+be >>blueca+Ye >>mrtksn+tl >>bee_ri+3n >>FinnKu+vo >>dyausp+hd1 >>p0w3n3+yv1 >>basisw+Gz1 >>sjw987+GB1
2. IlikeK+j1[view] [source] 2025-09-30 19:43:18
>>andai+(OP)
People who write this stuff still don't understand that big tech IS THE ENEMY. They are quite happy to implement this, even up into the OS Level. It's called Regulatory capture. Now your legal Moat to a true European Alternative has become even bigger.
replies(1): >>abtinf+Z4
3. lawles+b3[view] [source] 2025-09-30 19:53:05
>>andai+(OP)
>Then EU will be forced to make its own chat app

When did the US government make a chat app? Signal?

◧◩
4. abtinf+Z4[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-30 20:02:59
>>IlikeK+j1
Even if, for the sake of argument, we grant the premise “big tech IS THE ENEMY”, it does not necessarily follow that the vast mass surveillance national security apparatus is our friend.
replies(3): >>IlikeK+k5 >>cwillu+Wb >>joseph+ce
◧◩◪
5. IlikeK+k5[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-30 20:05:02
>>abtinf+Z4
I would never argue that and i hope that doesn't follow from my comment. To be absolutely clear: Any service that doesn't actively work for your privacy against any outside actor to the fullest extend of the law and technical possibility is to be considered an enemy of freedom.
6. psycho+U9[view] [source] 2025-09-30 20:29:53
>>andai+(OP)
I did contacted them. All of them who didn't yet have a referenced public position on fight chat control for France. By phone. Only two responded with a clear alignment. Good that I did it by phone, because apparently for some of them getting several thousand emails per day can only mean they are victim of a spam attack.

Not only they don't represent anything but there own little interests, but they won't even have the decency to express clearly what they are standing for. Even lip service is not assured anymore.

replies(2): >>xenoph+bk >>lores+uw
7. downri+Ha[view] [source] 2025-09-30 20:33:37
>>andai+(OP)
> Sending message...

> Sending to your local police dept... OK

> Sending to intended recipient... Failed

replies(1): >>bapak+wp
8. ben_w+1b[view] [source] 2025-09-30 20:35:55
>>andai+(OP)
Chat apps were already so oversupplied as to be free even before AI could vibe code them. Or, indeed, before the US relented on export bans for remotely adequate HTTPS implementations.

In other words: What pain?

replies(1): >>jobs_t+Kj
◧◩◪
9. cwillu+Wb[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-30 20:41:03
>>abtinf+Z4
It's the same coin.
10. blibbl+nd[view] [source] 2025-09-30 20:49:17
>>andai+(OP)
signal is open source, so they'll just download the source, build it, add a backdoor and push it to the app store

same as that weird official USgov version hosted by israel

replies(2): >>missed+Vd >>LordDr+Zp
11. drnick+Dd[view] [source] 2025-09-30 20:50:15
>>andai+(OP)
This 100%. There would be a lot more pushback in the EU against this nonsense if, overnight, EU users found the majority of their apps no longer work.
◧◩
12. missed+Vd[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-30 20:51:58
>>blibbl+nd
Sometimes I wonder who builds this stuff. I appreciate at the end of the day that everyone has bills, but I feel like I'd rather apply for public housing before I work on that. They're not even getting rich, just a wagie. I have never met someone in the tech industry that was ideologically anti-privacy. It's always the lawyers and politicians. But someone builds it.
replies(1): >>blibbl+ze
13. pagane+be[view] [source] 2025-09-30 20:53:08
>>andai+(OP)
> feel enough pain to contact their representatives

It doesn't work like that because the European "Parliament" is a joke. For starters, they can't initiate anything, they can only approve or reject (of course that it's almost always approve) stuff that is being passed to them from higher up, most of the times from the European Commission, if I'm not mistaken. Ah, they can pass/generate "resolutions", which are basically empty words put on a piece of paper.

Second, the people there don't "represent" anyone, at most they represent the political parties that have put them on the lists that got them into the European Parliament, but that's it.

replies(1): >>lawles+gi
◧◩◪
14. joseph+ce[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-30 20:53:11
>>abtinf+Z4
Personally I hate both surveillance systems. I hate the American big tech surveillance system - under which companies like imgur sell the personal data of its users to anyone who comes knocking. And I hate the European chat control proposal, where the government wants to take that data by force.

Privacy is a human right.

◧◩◪
15. blibbl+ze[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-30 20:55:00
>>missed+Vd
> Sometimes I wonder who builds this stuff.

the "secure" chat app supplied by some rando israeli company to the US government?

have a guess

replies(1): >>missed+dz
16. blueca+Ye[view] [source] 2025-09-30 20:56:31
>>andai+(OP)
We (in most EU countries) don't have representatives. Parties have representatives. To be listed on a ballot you need to be with good standings with your party and get chosen by them. Then various method ensure that you can't be elected if you are not a member of a party (anyone from a party below 5% is not getting in for example).

This means officials only care about what their party leaders tell them to do, not what voters think because voters matter very little to them. That's why American "contact your representatives" does very little here - they are not your representatives, they are representatives of party leaders.

◧◩
17. lawles+gi[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-30 21:14:41
>>pagane+be
>Second, the people there don't "represent" anyone,

I think that's largely down to people not taking EU elections as seriously as national elections.

The ones elected by my country are always largely the most doldrum people from the main parties that aren't charismatic enough to win in national elections (The b-squad basically)

... and a handful of the kind of people that think windfarms generate wind and that we need to leave NATO.. even though we haven't joined NATO. The kind of people you vote to send to the EU so that you don't have to see them.

There was an election in 2024 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_European_Parliament_elect...

For people unfamiliar with it https://elections.europa.eu/en/

The parliament is elected by people in each country, those elected them elect the commission. So a form of indirect elections.

replies(1): >>pagane+5j1
◧◩
18. jobs_t+Kj[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-30 21:25:30
>>ben_w+1b
Good luck with that!
replies(1): >>ben_w+tF
◧◩
19. xenoph+bk[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-30 21:27:43
>>psycho+U9
> getting several thousand emails per day can only mean they are victim of a spam attack

I think of calling my representative as being like proof of work. It takes a modicum of effort to look up their phone number, compose some spiel, and make the call, compared to delivering spam by the truckload.

20. mrtksn+tl[view] [source] 2025-09-30 21:35:47
>>andai+(OP)
> Then EU will be forced to make its own chat app, UX will be terrible,

Why? EU can just tell an LLM to build an alternative app, they can just tell it to make it user friendly and make no mistakes. That's the primary use case of Trillions of dollars of investment in GPUs and electricity to power them.

JK(or am I?), a protest will be a boon for EU, which is growing Anti-American each and every day. The EU alternatives don't exist not because Europeans can't code but because EU market is open to US companies and there's no reason for duplicate effort as winner takes it all thanks to network effects. EU capital just invests in USA based companies that operate in EU. It's much easier, lower taxes lower worker protection standards etc. Also, US has much more capital to burn to corner the markets, they also just go ahead and buy anything European i.e. Skype. and not risk competition.

replies(2): >>harvey+0m >>bapak+rp
◧◩
21. harvey+0m[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-30 21:39:18
>>mrtksn+tl
If you think that's a lot of electricity, you're going to be amazed how much they can spend on bureaucracy before they even start building anything.
replies(1): >>mrtksn+Jm
◧◩◪
22. mrtksn+Jm[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-30 21:44:18
>>harvey+0m
Electricity bureaucracy, whatever doesn't matter. Huge money is invested into making programmers obsolete and they are claiming that it already happens. If the tech is real, Europeans can just tell it to make them all these apps that American companies may choose to deprive EU to teach them a lesson.

If the AI tech is real then Europeans get their apps no need for American companies anymore. If the tech isn't real then the chat app makers(in Europe that's all Meta, WhatsApp + Messenger. Apple is a no go due to low market share) lose half of their revenue to teach Europeans a lesson. Europeans them switch to Signal, Telegram(Popular all over the place) or Viber(this one popular in Eastern Europe).

If they all decide to boycott, there you have opportunity to hit a 400M market. Let's say Europeans can make AAA games but can't code a chat app, give visa to US developers that were laid off for the last many years to come over. Maybe it's politically unpopular? Maybe they are not the best? That's fine, EU is an open market - anyone who is interested in making billions can just make a chat app and take over the EU market. Indians, Chinese, Turks, Africans, Americans that earn less than billions of dollars. It's a huge opportunity. Instantly.

Meta made $38.4 billion USD revenue in EU last year. It's very unlikely that no one will be interested in taking that. US companies aren't doing charity to EU, it's always their second largest revenue stream after USA.

23. bee_ri+3n[view] [source] 2025-09-30 21:46:34
>>andai+(OP)
This article is about an existing UK law and Imgur, an image hosting site (although, it does have some social features).
24. FinnKu+vo[view] [source] 2025-09-30 21:56:02
>>andai+(OP)
Why are we talking about the EU in this thread? I don't see how draconian UK laws relate to a proposed chat control law in the EU that hasn't even been drafted and would likely not survive a judicial challenge if it were to be approved.
replies(2): >>bapak+So >>lokar+Px
◧◩
25. bapak+So[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-30 22:00:05
>>FinnKu+vo
Well, it relates in that the UK also hates encryption and is extremely likely to get their own Chat Control anytime this decade.
replies(2): >>FinnKu+dq >>rightb+4s1
◧◩
26. bapak+rp[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-30 22:04:05
>>mrtksn+tl
I hate this so bad. You know that the solution will be that EU will block US companies (who do not comply) so EU users will eventually get their own WhatsApp called MsgMeNow. The result is that nobody can talk to people outside their own jurisdiction.

This is effectively what we see in China. They only use WeChat, I was unable to register because it says I need someone to verify my account when I try to do it (this has been happening since 2018)

replies(3): >>LightB+eq >>mrtksn+iq >>MammaM+iw
◧◩
27. bapak+wp[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-30 22:05:11
>>downri+Ha
> This phone is now locked

> Please open the door

◧◩
28. LordDr+Zp[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-30 22:08:14
>>blibbl+nd
Signal is AGPL licensed, so they would have to publish whatever crude hack they insert in order to install that back door. (not the keys, of course, but if they're this incompetent about tech legislation, I don't trust their QA competence to be top notch)
◧◩◪
29. FinnKu+dq[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-30 22:09:22
>>bapak+So
The same could be said for the US as well though looking at the EARN IT Act that is reintroduced every couple of years just like Chat Control in the EU with both having failed multiple times so far.
◧◩◪
30. LightB+eq[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-30 22:09:25
>>bapak+rp
Maybe that's a good thing. Have you read Snowcrash?
◧◩◪
31. mrtksn+iq[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-30 22:09:38
>>bapak+rp
Yes, that's the only way for EU to have a tech industry. That's also how any non-US tech industry exists.
replies(2): >>lmz+4y >>dboreh+NW
◧◩◪
32. MammaM+iw[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-30 22:50:58
>>bapak+rp
No worries! Trump will call Den Von Deleten, whatever her name is -- and she will just do what she is told whatever is the thing she is told to do. Exactly like it already happened with EU buying $700B of natural gas. We paid just a bit over $100B to Russians for the same thing... but you know... Trump told, so here we go!
replies(1): >>martim+Yy
◧◩
33. lores+uw[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-30 22:52:14
>>psycho+U9
Was it a Green and a Nazi?
replies(1): >>psycho+m72
◧◩
34. lokar+Px[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-30 23:00:01
>>FinnKu+vo
This is not about the EU, and it's also not about chat control, or encryption.

The only connection I see is "I don't like UK Internet policy"

◧◩◪◨
35. lmz+4y[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-30 23:02:07
>>mrtksn+iq
Social network balkanization through mutually incompatible legal requirements. I like it.
◧◩◪◨
36. martim+Yy[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-30 23:07:22
>>MammaM+iw
Any source for this comparison? Also did the EU buy it or said they will?
replies(1): >>ben_w+wG
◧◩◪◨
37. missed+dz[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-09-30 23:09:20
>>blibbl+ze
Talking more in reference to EU initiatives
◧◩◪
38. ben_w+tF[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-10-01 00:01:01
>>jobs_t+Kj
Do I detect some sarcasm in that response? If so, why? The Internet is literally just a communications protocol, adding a chat system on top of that it is not difficult.

Nor even was it when Skype and IRC were made (by Europeans). SMS (also European) was slightly harder to invent because that's not on the internet.

replies(1): >>DeepSe+zb1
◧◩◪◨⬒
39. ben_w+wG[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-10-01 00:11:06
>>martim+Yy
We said we would aspire to buying US gas. EU can't order member states around like that, and the member states themselves can't order private businesses who to buy from; US can't actually ship much more, even if it could it can't do so to us; and that's about 100% of our imports anyway (not just replacing Russian, replacing all of it) and the way global markets and fungible goods work is that it makes no difference who we buy it from or who sells it to us anyway.
◧◩◪◨
40. dboreh+NW[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-10-01 02:58:48
>>mrtksn+iq
Enjoy using your http alternative not invented outside the USA then. And your x86 CPU since ARM isn't American.
◧◩◪◨
41. DeepSe+zb1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-10-01 06:06:03
>>ben_w+tF
The technical aspects of the software aren't the problem. Convincing enough people to adopt your app before you're getting a great deal on a 20sqft studio apartment is.
replies(1): >>ben_w+Qk1
42. dyausp+hd1[view] [source] 2025-10-01 06:23:21
>>andai+(OP)
I might be the only one that’s in support of chat control. I would like the internet to be so walled off that it becomes boring and maybe it will stop all the brainrot.
◧◩◪
43. pagane+5j1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-10-01 07:25:08
>>lawles+gi
> I think that's largely down to people not taking EU elections as seriously as national elections.

No, they don't represent anyone because we, the European people, are voting based on lists, we do not select our own "representatives" by name and surname. This "contact your representative" trope is an American thingie, which, like many American thingies, has no place outside of its original context.

◧◩◪◨⬒
44. ben_w+Qk1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-10-01 07:48:00
>>DeepSe+zb1
Yes, and?

This is a response to a hypothetical where every single existing (or possibly just US) chat provider leaves the EU, and I'm saying the claim that this will cause any degree of pain whatsoever to the EU population is ridiculous because the replacements are far too trivial to not immediately replace the US apps.

replies(1): >>sjw987+aC1
◧◩◪
45. rightb+4s1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-10-01 09:17:58
>>bapak+So
The UK allready has its own Chat Control-ish though in:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_Safety_Act_2023

46. p0w3n3+yv1[view] [source] 2025-10-01 09:59:03
>>andai+(OP)
> Then EU will be forced to make its own chat app

We'll make our own Chat App! With blackjack! And...

47. basisw+Gz1[view] [source] 2025-10-01 10:48:32
>>andai+(OP)
This is nothing to do with Chat Control or the EU.
48. sjw987+GB1[view] [source] 2025-10-01 11:10:52
>>andai+(OP)
Why would the UX be terrible necessarily?

If the EU or companies within did make a chat app and it got widespread appeal, it would just be exactly the same as WhatsApp. WhatsApp isn't special in any way whatsoever, besides having a critical mass of users.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
49. sjw987+aC1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-10-01 11:16:22
>>ben_w+Qk1
I fully support your argument and can't understand why people in this thread assume the EU doesn't have millions of programmers who can bash out a chat app, one of which would rise above the others and get a critical mass of users.

Sometimes I think it would be good for Meta, X, Google etc. to lose market share in the EU and UK. It's ridiculous that we're beholden to one country for so much software, and they're all being actively enshitified anyway.

◧◩◪
50. psycho+m72[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-10-01 14:49:30
>>lores+uw
I don’t have my spreadsheet at hand, but obviously no one overtly pretend to be a Nazi among MEP. I’m not aware of the arcanes, but it seems to me that it’s part of their obligations, and some MEPs were actually already sanctioned over this.

https://www.politico.eu/article/european-parliament-meps-sus... https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20250331IP...

[go to top]