I think the confusion with passkeys comes from that fact that everyone wants to own you so you have to be mindful if this passkey is being stored on the OS, the browser, sync'd between devices through google or apple, etc.

Someone saying that work-life balance means all work and no life, and then producing substandard quality at said work seems worth pointing out.

A trillion dollar company vibe-porting a vibe-coded low quality product for clout/advertisement seems worth a call-out.

More outlandish conspiracy theories on hackernews...

You are in fact wrong - see the myriad of rules advertising, especially what can be advertised on children's TV.

What messages are not being allowed to be 'streamed into the brains of the population' exactly? Are you suggesting, for example, that claims made by the US president should not be shown on TV? Are you suggesting that these are not then analysed and scrutinised by people on TV?

I do not want E2E comms broken, but these posts on hackernews always bring out such outlandish claims.

You can't be applying the "mass control" claim for the attempts at stopping the spread of CSAM? So can you point to any evidence of wide spread "mass control" with Chat Control 1.0?

Why would you NOT want this to exist? This seems the only method to not raise false positives.

Well the criteria is CSAM?

Do you have any evidence that these systems have been used to imprison someone that wasn't CSAM related?

Really you should have felt betrayed back in 2011.

This isn't Chat Control 2.0 - which is the thing that has been getting attention for the last few years.

E2E encryption should not be broken, we should find other ways to catch and find predators.

Scanning messages in platforms (Chat Control 1.0)? I honestly thought this has always been done, I don't consider any platform private.

A lot of Internet regulations are just catching up to ones that exist in meat space.

I think what scares people when the regulations come to the Internet is that they are highly automated, and I think there's potential for mass injustices when automated systems.

At the same time, the abuse of children has also been automated and amplified by the Internet. https://youtu.be/QYcAFanHwf8?t=1666

Or are we saying this is being used for something specific that happens to be illegal?

It was extending a recently expired law that has existed since 2011.

I don't think your comment is reflecting on what has actually happened. "Chat Control" as people know it has not passed into law.

Some EU citizens want it? You'd be surprised on the views of some people.

The simple fact is that a law that existed since 2011 and expired in April is now back in effect. So we are back where we were on February.

I don't remember moving from an anti-democratic hell scape to serene democratic beauty back in April so it's probably a nothing-burger.

I often see news articles that trade on the fact the general populace aren't professional bureaucrats and so frame anything happening in unpopular ways.

These pithy remarks don't really extend the debate or have any nuance - they just sound conspiratorial.

There are plenty of reasons to "scan" communications.

There are plenty of reasons to have limits on communication "scanning".

What part of the spectrum do you fall on?

I would be utterly shocked if facebook et al. were not scanning all of your messages (either in transit or at terminus to get around 'E2E' claims).

A machine that chews up the worlds literature and spins out a best guess at what the next word should be does not have intent, and the vast majority of the time is used by unscrupulous people purely for profit and/or deception.

An LLM and a living human being are not the same thing, I am tired of apologists comparing them as if they are.

It's not surprising that a computer (doing trillions of calculations on a billion parameter model that was trained on the world's literature) can string a coherent sentence together...