←back to thread

Denmark reportedly withdraws Chat Control proposal following controversy

(therecord.media)
568 points layer8 | 1 comments | 30 Oct 25 21:35 UTC | HN request time: 0.198s | source
Show context
ineedasername ◴[31 Oct 25 03:35 UTC] No.45768131[source]▶
I’m continually astounded that so many people, faced with a societal problem, reflexively turn to “Hmmm, perhaps if we monitored and read and listened to every single thing that every person does, all of the time…”

As though it would 1) be a practical possibility and 2) be effective.

Compounding the issue is that the more technology can solve #1, the more these people fixate on it as the solution without regards to the lack of #2.

I wish there were a way, once and for all, to prevent this ridiculous idea from taking hold over and over again. If I could get a hold of such people when these ideas were in their infancy… perhaps I should monitor everything everyone does and watch for people considering the same as a solution to their problem… ah well, no, still don’t see how that follows logically as a reasonable solution.

replies(17): >>45768311 #>>45768758 #>>45768812 #>>45768845 #>>45768873 #>>45769030 #>>45769192 #>>45769801 #>>45769868 #>>45769961 #>>45770005 #>>45770264 #>>45770801 #>>45770827 #>>45771089 #>>45772424 #>>45776034 #
9dev ◴[31 Oct 25 09:22 UTC] No.45769961[source]▶
I think a lot of this is rooted in the basic world view people have. Those with a conservative mindset will think of humans as fundamentally flawed, misguided creatures that need to be contained and steered so they don’t veer of the path, which they are naturally inclined to; while those with a liberal mindset consider humans to be inherently kind and only misguided by circumstances and their environment.

Most people can pretty clearly relate to one of these perspectives over the other, and it’s pretty clear what actions follow from that.

replies(6): >>45770053 #>>45770279 #>>45770316 #>>45770409 #>>45771802 #>>45776937 #
1. BoxOfRain ◴[31 Oct 25 10:27 UTC] No.45770409[source]▶
I think that's a little simplistic, I have liberal (in the British English sense) views specifically because I think humanity is fundamentally flawed. If we are all flawed particularly when it comes to wielding power over others, it's self-evident in my opinion that governments should be limited and the total power any individual or institution can amass should have a hard ceiling. I see explicit anti-authoritarianism as a necessary counterweight to our flawed nature, every exercise of political power is potentially harmful but through the ideas developed in the Enlightenment it can at least be contained and controlled.

Humans are inherently flawed and they're inherently kind. We're evolutionarily primed for competition and cooperation. Antisocial behaviour can be both inherent and environmental. I feel you might be setting up a false dichotomy when the motivations for political beliefs are often pretty complex and varied.