nickslaughter02

original title: California’s New Age-Verification Bill Frees Linux But Expands Age Tracking to the Open Web

original title: From essential security tools to restricted circumvention software: The EU signals that VPNs are the next target following the release of its age verification app

> 403 ERROR

> The request could not be satisfied.

> Generated by cloudfront (CloudFront)

EU sovereignty in practice.

> His bill was examined in committee at the National Assembly in September and has been stalled since.

This will be required in firmware eventually.

Pulled?

> Bill sponsors Rep. Brad Paquette, R-Niles, and Sen. John Cherry, D-Flint, are now working with advocacy groups on potential replacement legislation, according to the MFEI.

https://archive.is/hI3wJ

A mistake.

How many billions will EU countries spend on this bull shit? Who needs it?

> Britain paying highest electricity prices in the world for second year running

> Ed Miliband’s net zero targets are facing fresh scrutiny after Britain was found to be paying the highest electricity prices in the developed world.

> New data published on Tuesday showed the price paid by UK industry for power was 63pc higher than in France and 27pc higher than in Germany.

> Britain is also the second-most expensive country in the world for household electricity, with billpayers paying twice as much as those in the US.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/britain-paying-highest-e...

> EPP voted against both

EPP wanted indiscriminate scanning instead, not targeted one (the goal of the amendments).

EPP wanted indiscriminate scanning instead, not targeted one.

> So, in the end a big majority of the conservative/liberal faction (EPP) voted against, and the vast majority of the social democractic faction (S&D) voted for chat control.

EPP wanted indiscriminate scanning instead, not targeted one.

> Would have been better if they just sat on their hands and did nothing in the first place

You described 95% of EU's work.

Sweep it under ProtectEU.

> The European Commission wants a backdoor for end-to-end encryptions for law enforcement

https://www.techradar.com/pro/security/the-european-commissi...

Yes, voluntary Chat Control 1.0 has been running since 2021.

> some EPP members voted against it

20 out of 184

> Nice to see that democracy can work

Did it work? One political party (EPP) didn't like the result of the previous vote and so they forced a re-vote.

> After the European Parliament had already rejected the indiscriminate and blanket Chat Control by US tech companies on 13 March, conservative forces attempted a democratically highly questionable maneuver yesterday to force a repeat vote to extend the law anyway.

https://www.patrick-breyer.de/en/end-of-chat-control-eu-parl...

Also: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47529609

> Despite today’s victory, further procedural steps by EU governments cannot be completely ruled out. Most of all, the trilogue negotiations on a permanent child protection regulation (Chat Control 2.0) are continuing under severe time pressure. There, too, EU governments continue to insist on their demand for “voluntary” indiscriminate Chat Control.

> Furthermore, the next massive threat to digital civil liberties is already on the agenda: Next up in the ongoing trilogue, lawmakers will negotiate whether messenger and chat services, as well as app stores, will be legally obliged to implement age verification. This would require users to provide ID documents or submit to facial scans, effectively making anonymous communication impossible and severely endangering vulnerable groups such as whistleblowers and persecuted individuals.

The party that wants this the most is EPP - you can't be more pro-EU than that.

> Despite today’s victory, further procedural steps by EU governments cannot be completely ruled out. Most of all, the trilogue negotiations on a permanent child protection regulation (Chat Control 2.0) are continuing under severe time pressure. There, too, EU governments continue to insist on their demand for “voluntary” indiscriminate Chat Control.

> Furthermore, the next massive threat to digital civil liberties is already on the agenda: Next up in the ongoing trilogue, lawmakers will negotiate whether messenger and chat services, as well as app stores, will be legally obliged to implement age verification. This would require users to provide ID documents or submit to facial scans, effectively making anonymous communication impossible and severely endangering vulnerable groups such as whistleblowers and persecuted individuals.

original title: The Battle Over Chat Control: How EU Governments and the Tech Lobby Are Trying to Overturn Parliament’s Vote — A Comprehensive Fact Check

Petition US Congress: Say no to bad internet bills

https://www.badinternetbills.com/

> It can get worse. New York’s proposed Senate Bill S8102A requires adults to prove they’re adults to use a computer, exercise bike, smart watch, or car if the device is internet enabled with app ecosystems. The bill explicitly forbids self-reporting and leaves the allowed methods to regulations written by the Attorney General.

Hacker News damaged the link: https://github.com/flatpak/xdg-desktop-portal/pull/1922#issu...

> To require devices to conduct commercially reasonable age assurance for users under the age of 18 at the point of device activation, unlocking the ability to enforce all other digital privacy and safety laws for underage users

Original title: Mullvad VPN takes its banned anti-surveillance ad to the streets after UK TV rejection

> Patrick Breyer: Greens/Pirates & Left file amendments to end ChatControl 1.0 mass scanning! We need to win the majority in the LIBE committee now – this is our chance! Ask your MEPs: Are you for or against ChatControl?

https://fightchatcontrol.eu/#contact-tool

The UK is the number one enemy of security and encryption. Did you read and compile all of the libraries and clients yourself?

You answered it yourself. They can't extract billions if the company is still small.

> One of the most dangerous parts of the DSA is the massive power it hands to the commission, the EU’s international regulatory arm. While much of EU regulatory enforcement occurs at the national level, which is more accountable to voters, the DSA empowers the commission to investigate platforms and levy fines of up to 6% of their global annual revenue for each violation. In these investigations, the commission acts as both prosecutor and judge—accusing companies of noncompliance under a broad, ambiguous law, then deciding if companies’ answers are enough to disprove the allegations. An American court would strike down such a law as both unconstitutionally vague and a travesty of due process.